Por invitacion y casi exigencia de mis estimados twitteros, @mariana_war y @lamparadiogenes subo el video de las mujeres del sindicato mexicano de electricistas,.. quienes estan haciendo una huelga de hambre para protestar por la ilegalidad de la extincion de Luz y Fuerza del Centro.
This video is about women who are protesting against the unlawful closure of 'Luz y Fuerza del Centro' one of the two electricity state owned companies. It is argued that Mexican government is preparing the terrain to undergo another privatisation.
More videos at lampara de Diogenes youtube channel,..
Monday, December 07, 2009
Friday, August 28, 2009
Paramilitares al poder!!
Si los 3 anhos que han pasado no te han sido suficientes, solo esperate a lo que viene!
Estos tres primeros anhos de 'gobierno' de Felipe Calderon han estado marcados por la violencia en todos sus sentidos. Desde el no respeto por las instituciones a las cuales se les ha inyectado una buena dosis de corrupcion, la violencia contra las mujeres, de quienes se degrada su imagen, hasta las formas mas crudas de violencia fisica donde ya no solo se asesina, sino que se hace con tal sanha que da la impresion que se esta imponiendo un ejemplo a la poblacion.
Y eso que en estos tres anhos los legisladores y magistrados de la suprema corte no se les podia acusar mas que de ser transas,... bueno a uno que otro priista se le podia acusar de haber sido un gandalla tambien. Esto porque ahora quienes van a llegar al poder legislativo son, han sido, y yo creo que con mayor razon seguiran siendo PARAMILITARES en activo.
Elpidio Desiderio Concha Arellano es quizas no el ejemplo mas fuerte del paramilitarismo Oaxaquenho, pero tal vez es el mas claro en cuanto como estos delincuentes van haciendose de espacios de poder. Este malandrin ha sido acusado casi de todo, desde el asesinato, la extorsion, el robo, bueno que le falta? ahh si legislar,... a favor de sus compadres.
Que podriamos esperar para los anhos que vienen en el Calderonato? desde luego muy poco desde el poder legislativo, y me refiero al estado de Oaxaca. Que beneficios le podria traer este 'diputado' a las comunidades indigenas que el personalmente ha instigado? que beneficios politicos le podria traer al estado en su conjunto. Se ve muy dificil que siquiera se interese en hacer algo por el estado.
Lo que no se ve tan complicado es que quiera beneficiarse el y beneficiar a su gente cercana con el uso del presupuesto federal, y tal vez me pudiera aventurar a decir que con el desvio de los fondos federales destinados a los mas pobres.
Pero mencione que no es quiza el mejor ejemplo del paramilitarismo en Oaxaca. Creo que el ejemplo mas crudo y mas detestable esta en el pueblo natal de Ulises Ruis, tal vez el mismo este dirigiendo las acciones de sus grupos paramilitares, como el que comanda Freddy Eucario Morales Arias quien con sus muchachitos asesinaron a 3 personas el anho pasado.
Tambien mencione que el asesinato ya no es suficiente para estos maleantes, y es que al parecer entre todos empezaron a golpear a un taxista, al verse acorralado y tal vez para huir de la golpiza este se encerro en su coche. Ahi mismo lo rociaron con gasolina, le prendieron fuego y lo le impidieron que saliera, el hombre desesperado solo alcanzo a tocar el claxon pidiendo ayuda pero fue inutil y murio.
Dos personas que fueron a intentar ayudar al taxista tambien fueron golpeados, a uno lo asesinaron disparandole en la cara, al otro ademas segun cuentan le echaron liquido de bateria en las piernas, desde los testiculos hasta los pies. Se deshizo, y los paramilitares que para ese entonces estaban ya borrachos o drogados, o las dos cosas, arrastraron su cuerpo por el pueblo.
El siguiente sitio de internet contiene informacion mas detallada al respecto y fotografias de las personas asesinadas (son muy fuertes).
http://www.santodomingomassacre.org/
y en el siguiente video, se puede ver la version de una persona de la comunidad hacerca de lo que sucedio.
algunos meses despues de estos hechos de violencia y haciendo gala de la impunidad que le brindan tanto la policia estal, la federal como el ejercito, un grupo de paramilitares secuestro a toda la comunidad,
Ulises Ruiz, através de sus empleados hizoo saber que solo era un insignificante grupo de ‘roba vacas’, y que la seguridad de las personas en esta comunidad estaba garantizada al cien por ciento.
Lo cierto es que pueblo quedo incomunicado, y ni la policía ni el ejercito llegaron al lugar o a las cercanías, o si lo hicieron habría sido para llevarles víveres a los alrededor de 50 paramilitares. Que espero la pgr o la pfp para entrar y arrestar a los asesinos? El simple hecho de portar arma es un delito federal, ahora portar armas del calibre que muestran debería ser motivo de actuación inmediata.
El uso de paramilitares con fines de limpieza étnica no es nuevo. En Chiapas esto ha sido una práctica cotidiana. Los chinchulines, paz y justicia son solo algunos ejemplos de grupos que el ejército y la policía han armado y protegido ante el horror de Organismos de Derechos Humanos tanto nacionales como internacionales. En Oaxaca esta practica no ha sido la excepción tal vez no ha tenido la magnitud que en Chiapas donde los grupos paramilitares ocupaban incluso los medios de comunicación para intimidar a personas por nombre y apellido, pero los grupos de Ulises Ruiz coordinados por Jorge Franco ahí la llevan.
La forma de operacion de los paramilitares Chiapanecos se aprecia clarmente en el documental 'a place call Chiapas', que es anterior a la masacre de Acteal.
[En lo personal creo que la docuemtnalista se va mas por el lado romantizoide con el cara de trapo y no le da la importancia que tiene la existencia de grupos paramilitares protegidos y ayudados por el ejercito,.. vaya hasta el capitnacito del ejercito se ve que les tiene miedo,... ]
Otro elemento mas que habra que tomar en cuenta es que la gloriosa suprema corte de 'justicia', decidio liberar a los asesinos de la masacre de Acteal. Esto es, le dio sento un precedente y dio cabida en los hechos a la accion de paramilitares en el pais.
Si bien es cierto que los paramilitares simpre han existido, nomas hay que recordar los pasajes del 68, 73, donde se hablaba del batallon olimpia, los halcones y demas fauna, tambien es cierto que su accion NUNCA fue aceptada por el gobierno, ni tampoco nunca fue tan abierta.
Estos tres primeros anhos de 'gobierno' de Felipe Calderon han estado marcados por la violencia en todos sus sentidos. Desde el no respeto por las instituciones a las cuales se les ha inyectado una buena dosis de corrupcion, la violencia contra las mujeres, de quienes se degrada su imagen, hasta las formas mas crudas de violencia fisica donde ya no solo se asesina, sino que se hace con tal sanha que da la impresion que se esta imponiendo un ejemplo a la poblacion.
Y eso que en estos tres anhos los legisladores y magistrados de la suprema corte no se les podia acusar mas que de ser transas,... bueno a uno que otro priista se le podia acusar de haber sido un gandalla tambien. Esto porque ahora quienes van a llegar al poder legislativo son, han sido, y yo creo que con mayor razon seguiran siendo PARAMILITARES en activo.
Elpidio Desiderio Concha Arellano es quizas no el ejemplo mas fuerte del paramilitarismo Oaxaquenho, pero tal vez es el mas claro en cuanto como estos delincuentes van haciendose de espacios de poder. Este malandrin ha sido acusado casi de todo, desde el asesinato, la extorsion, el robo, bueno que le falta? ahh si legislar,... a favor de sus compadres.
Que podriamos esperar para los anhos que vienen en el Calderonato? desde luego muy poco desde el poder legislativo, y me refiero al estado de Oaxaca. Que beneficios le podria traer este 'diputado' a las comunidades indigenas que el personalmente ha instigado? que beneficios politicos le podria traer al estado en su conjunto. Se ve muy dificil que siquiera se interese en hacer algo por el estado.
Lo que no se ve tan complicado es que quiera beneficiarse el y beneficiar a su gente cercana con el uso del presupuesto federal, y tal vez me pudiera aventurar a decir que con el desvio de los fondos federales destinados a los mas pobres.
Pero mencione que no es quiza el mejor ejemplo del paramilitarismo en Oaxaca. Creo que el ejemplo mas crudo y mas detestable esta en el pueblo natal de Ulises Ruis, tal vez el mismo este dirigiendo las acciones de sus grupos paramilitares, como el que comanda Freddy Eucario Morales Arias quien con sus muchachitos asesinaron a 3 personas el anho pasado.
Tambien mencione que el asesinato ya no es suficiente para estos maleantes, y es que al parecer entre todos empezaron a golpear a un taxista, al verse acorralado y tal vez para huir de la golpiza este se encerro en su coche. Ahi mismo lo rociaron con gasolina, le prendieron fuego y lo le impidieron que saliera, el hombre desesperado solo alcanzo a tocar el claxon pidiendo ayuda pero fue inutil y murio.
Dos personas que fueron a intentar ayudar al taxista tambien fueron golpeados, a uno lo asesinaron disparandole en la cara, al otro ademas segun cuentan le echaron liquido de bateria en las piernas, desde los testiculos hasta los pies. Se deshizo, y los paramilitares que para ese entonces estaban ya borrachos o drogados, o las dos cosas, arrastraron su cuerpo por el pueblo.
El siguiente sitio de internet contiene informacion mas detallada al respecto y fotografias de las personas asesinadas (son muy fuertes).
http://www.santodomingomassacre.org/
y en el siguiente video, se puede ver la version de una persona de la comunidad hacerca de lo que sucedio.
algunos meses despues de estos hechos de violencia y haciendo gala de la impunidad que le brindan tanto la policia estal, la federal como el ejercito, un grupo de paramilitares secuestro a toda la comunidad,
Ulises Ruiz, através de sus empleados hizoo saber que solo era un insignificante grupo de ‘roba vacas’, y que la seguridad de las personas en esta comunidad estaba garantizada al cien por ciento.
Lo cierto es que pueblo quedo incomunicado, y ni la policía ni el ejercito llegaron al lugar o a las cercanías, o si lo hicieron habría sido para llevarles víveres a los alrededor de 50 paramilitares. Que espero la pgr o la pfp para entrar y arrestar a los asesinos? El simple hecho de portar arma es un delito federal, ahora portar armas del calibre que muestran debería ser motivo de actuación inmediata.
El uso de paramilitares con fines de limpieza étnica no es nuevo. En Chiapas esto ha sido una práctica cotidiana. Los chinchulines, paz y justicia son solo algunos ejemplos de grupos que el ejército y la policía han armado y protegido ante el horror de Organismos de Derechos Humanos tanto nacionales como internacionales. En Oaxaca esta practica no ha sido la excepción tal vez no ha tenido la magnitud que en Chiapas donde los grupos paramilitares ocupaban incluso los medios de comunicación para intimidar a personas por nombre y apellido, pero los grupos de Ulises Ruiz coordinados por Jorge Franco ahí la llevan.
La forma de operacion de los paramilitares Chiapanecos se aprecia clarmente en el documental 'a place call Chiapas', que es anterior a la masacre de Acteal.
[En lo personal creo que la docuemtnalista se va mas por el lado romantizoide con el cara de trapo y no le da la importancia que tiene la existencia de grupos paramilitares protegidos y ayudados por el ejercito,.. vaya hasta el capitnacito del ejercito se ve que les tiene miedo,... ]
Otro elemento mas que habra que tomar en cuenta es que la gloriosa suprema corte de 'justicia', decidio liberar a los asesinos de la masacre de Acteal. Esto es, le dio sento un precedente y dio cabida en los hechos a la accion de paramilitares en el pais.
Si bien es cierto que los paramilitares simpre han existido, nomas hay que recordar los pasajes del 68, 73, donde se hablaba del batallon olimpia, los halcones y demas fauna, tambien es cierto que su accion NUNCA fue aceptada por el gobierno, ni tampoco nunca fue tan abierta.
Monday, June 22, 2009
‘El verdadero Andrés Manuel’
Comentario sobre ‘El verdadero Andrés Manuel’ de Denise Maerker (publicado 19 de Junio de 2009 en el Universal)
Por Wet_ahuizote
Andrés Manuel no es el mismo del 2006, dice la columna de Denise Maerker del 19 de junio. Tiene toda la razón. Tal vez a Denise le sorprenda lo mucho que ha cambiado no solo Andrés Manuel, sino la mayoría de mexicanos, y el país entero. Lo sorprendente para mi es que Denise quiera que sigamos siendo los mismos, que no tengamos esa capacidad de asombro y de indignación ante los miles de asesinatos que nomás no logran justificar la presencia de Calderón y toda su ineptitud y corrupción. Tampoco tendríamos que simplemente continuar con nuestra ‘vida diaria’ como si nada pasara cuando vemos que el modelo económico esta costando vidas de niños. Tal vez para Denise sea de lo más normal emitir una opinión por escrito o ante las cámaras de televisión donde manifieste cierta molestia, para luego una vez fuera del aire, volver a la rutina de una vida cómoda; el resto de los mexicanos no tenemos esa opción.
Denise hace una serie de preguntas interesantes:
‘¿El Andrés Manuel que vimos el martes en Iztapalapa es el mismo que logró que 15 millones de mexicanos lo eligieran en el 2006?’
En mi personal opinión Andrés Manuel es el mismo que rompió con un sistema corrupto que no garantizaba el avance democrático del país. Junto con otro grupo de políticos notables salieron del pri, fundaron un movimiento que terminó en partido político y que ahora da signos de haberse agotado y no representa ninguna garantía de pugnar por el más mínimo avance democrático, sino al contrario. ¿O será que Denise conoce a otro Andrés Manuel? ¿Cual?
¿Ese hombre de semblante duro, actitud desafiante y estrategia arrogante es el que conquistó a millones durante años de campaña?
Si, las trampas y la corrupción que impera en nuestras ‘instituciones’ tienen un efecto desalentador en la mayoría de los ciudadanos. Nos causa molestia ver como gran parte de la riqueza nacional se destina a mantener instituciones que no sirven al interés general, sino a uno muy particular: el de la elite gobernante personificada en Calderón. Claro la diferencia es que no todos tenemos el valor de hacer algo al respecto, ni un pequeño esfuerzo; en cambio Andrés Manuel si ha tenido ese valor. Más aun, ha tenido la capacidad y el liderazgo para planear una estrategia y encabezarla. Creo que eso es lo que ha conquistado a millones, ¿o Denise considera que ha sido otra cosa?
Las ultimas dos preguntas francamente están fuera de lugar dado que se basan en una construcción mental que Denise ha tenido a bien elaborarse para si misma. ¿Nos engañó o es otro? ¿La derrota lo cambió o sólo exacerbó su peor parte? Tal vez Denise se formo una imagen de un político negociador, dispuesto a seguirle el juego a las decisiones de nuestros muy ‘ilustres’ magistrados pero ¿En que baso esta idea Denise? Habrá que esperar a que nos ilustre esta ‘analista’ del canal de las estrellas.
Dice esta mujer que Andrés Manuel humillo a ‘Juanito’ sin necesidad. Me imagino que Denise piensa que la humillación es justificable bajo ciertas circunstancias. Estoy de acuerdo, sin embargo, que si hay humillados por parte de Andrés Manuel, pero a diferencia de Denise (y casi todos los columnistas de la prensa mexicana) creo que los humillados son los magistrados de trife a quienes la estrategia de AMLO exhibe como lo que son: unos corruptos serviles.
Pienso que la humillación no es por parte de AMLO, o por lo menos no del todo. Me explico: AMLO presento una propuesta de acción para hacer valer la voluntad de los votantes en Iztapalapa, si la propuesta prospera o no, dependerá única y exclusivamente de la voluntad de la gente que vote. Si como se espera gana el PT, la gente estaría mandando un mensaje clarísimo al tribunal y de paso al gobierno: La soberanía popular esta por encima de las instituciones. Lo cual seria un logro en términos de avance democrático. Iztapalapa pasaría a ser la primera gran batalla electoral para el movimiento de resistencia civil. Si por el contrario no gana el PT en Iztapalapa porque la gente no voto, el conformismo habrá ganado las instituciones títere y el gobierno podrían darse un respiro por lo menos hasta las próximas elecciones. Y el coro de ‘analistas’ políticos tendrían materia para poder criticar a gusto a Andrés Manuel y al movimiento de resistencia civil pacífica, lo cual les esta haciendo mucha falta.
Por ultimo, Denise no hace más que unirse al coro de voces ‘criticas’ de Andrés Manuel, lo cual es muy lamentable. Personalmente la hubiera preferido como una critica del sistema político, como originalmente decía ser.
Por Wet_ahuizote
Andrés Manuel no es el mismo del 2006, dice la columna de Denise Maerker del 19 de junio. Tiene toda la razón. Tal vez a Denise le sorprenda lo mucho que ha cambiado no solo Andrés Manuel, sino la mayoría de mexicanos, y el país entero. Lo sorprendente para mi es que Denise quiera que sigamos siendo los mismos, que no tengamos esa capacidad de asombro y de indignación ante los miles de asesinatos que nomás no logran justificar la presencia de Calderón y toda su ineptitud y corrupción. Tampoco tendríamos que simplemente continuar con nuestra ‘vida diaria’ como si nada pasara cuando vemos que el modelo económico esta costando vidas de niños. Tal vez para Denise sea de lo más normal emitir una opinión por escrito o ante las cámaras de televisión donde manifieste cierta molestia, para luego una vez fuera del aire, volver a la rutina de una vida cómoda; el resto de los mexicanos no tenemos esa opción.
Denise hace una serie de preguntas interesantes:
‘¿El Andrés Manuel que vimos el martes en Iztapalapa es el mismo que logró que 15 millones de mexicanos lo eligieran en el 2006?’
En mi personal opinión Andrés Manuel es el mismo que rompió con un sistema corrupto que no garantizaba el avance democrático del país. Junto con otro grupo de políticos notables salieron del pri, fundaron un movimiento que terminó en partido político y que ahora da signos de haberse agotado y no representa ninguna garantía de pugnar por el más mínimo avance democrático, sino al contrario. ¿O será que Denise conoce a otro Andrés Manuel? ¿Cual?
¿Ese hombre de semblante duro, actitud desafiante y estrategia arrogante es el que conquistó a millones durante años de campaña?
Si, las trampas y la corrupción que impera en nuestras ‘instituciones’ tienen un efecto desalentador en la mayoría de los ciudadanos. Nos causa molestia ver como gran parte de la riqueza nacional se destina a mantener instituciones que no sirven al interés general, sino a uno muy particular: el de la elite gobernante personificada en Calderón. Claro la diferencia es que no todos tenemos el valor de hacer algo al respecto, ni un pequeño esfuerzo; en cambio Andrés Manuel si ha tenido ese valor. Más aun, ha tenido la capacidad y el liderazgo para planear una estrategia y encabezarla. Creo que eso es lo que ha conquistado a millones, ¿o Denise considera que ha sido otra cosa?
Las ultimas dos preguntas francamente están fuera de lugar dado que se basan en una construcción mental que Denise ha tenido a bien elaborarse para si misma. ¿Nos engañó o es otro? ¿La derrota lo cambió o sólo exacerbó su peor parte? Tal vez Denise se formo una imagen de un político negociador, dispuesto a seguirle el juego a las decisiones de nuestros muy ‘ilustres’ magistrados pero ¿En que baso esta idea Denise? Habrá que esperar a que nos ilustre esta ‘analista’ del canal de las estrellas.
Dice esta mujer que Andrés Manuel humillo a ‘Juanito’ sin necesidad. Me imagino que Denise piensa que la humillación es justificable bajo ciertas circunstancias. Estoy de acuerdo, sin embargo, que si hay humillados por parte de Andrés Manuel, pero a diferencia de Denise (y casi todos los columnistas de la prensa mexicana) creo que los humillados son los magistrados de trife a quienes la estrategia de AMLO exhibe como lo que son: unos corruptos serviles.
Pienso que la humillación no es por parte de AMLO, o por lo menos no del todo. Me explico: AMLO presento una propuesta de acción para hacer valer la voluntad de los votantes en Iztapalapa, si la propuesta prospera o no, dependerá única y exclusivamente de la voluntad de la gente que vote. Si como se espera gana el PT, la gente estaría mandando un mensaje clarísimo al tribunal y de paso al gobierno: La soberanía popular esta por encima de las instituciones. Lo cual seria un logro en términos de avance democrático. Iztapalapa pasaría a ser la primera gran batalla electoral para el movimiento de resistencia civil. Si por el contrario no gana el PT en Iztapalapa porque la gente no voto, el conformismo habrá ganado las instituciones títere y el gobierno podrían darse un respiro por lo menos hasta las próximas elecciones. Y el coro de ‘analistas’ políticos tendrían materia para poder criticar a gusto a Andrés Manuel y al movimiento de resistencia civil pacífica, lo cual les esta haciendo mucha falta.
Por ultimo, Denise no hace más que unirse al coro de voces ‘criticas’ de Andrés Manuel, lo cual es muy lamentable. Personalmente la hubiera preferido como una critica del sistema político, como originalmente decía ser.
Saturday, May 16, 2009
Mexican version of a Pink Floyd' song
Hey I just came across this video,... the guys sitting there seem to have fun, and so did I,.. enjoy,..
pink floyd in hermosillo
pink floyd in hermosillo
Tuesday, May 05, 2009
New virus,.. new business??
It has come to my attention that several people started talking about the possibility that this new swine flu was a man made virus. Then they go on linking that with two main things: a) US new war strategy and B) Mexican internal political situation.
A) US new war strategy, where biological weapons are used. That possibility is fueled by a document by the US air force 'air force 2025'. In that document it is predicted that by 2009 there was going to be an outbreak of influenza that would eventually kill some 30 million persons.
the link to such document is here
air force 2025
Especially the report tittled 'Alternate Futures for 2025: Security Planning to Avoid Surprise' in page 68 offers the schedule for the next 16 years of so,.. the whole planning process started back in 1996.
In page 67 it says that 'Technology could not solve some old problems, as in 2009, when an influenza pandemic struck in southern China, then rapidly spread worldwide.17 Three hundred-thirty million people were affected and over thirty million died.18 No one ever determined if the virus was a natural mutation or bioengineered.19
Many feared the latter.'
Then in the following page it presents a diagram where is clear that 2009 is the year influenza strikes. It also predicts that by 2010 UN would dissolve 'due to its inability ot resolve these issues and regional conflicts'
And here is a video with an enterview with Alfredo Jalife who is an expert in geopolitics,..
In addition, there are other voices claiming that the virus was produced in a laboratory somewhere in England, then transported to US and then planted in Mexico. Furthermore, they link pharmaceutical companies with the production of such a virus. Their aim is purely monetary. Mmaking their business grow and their profits does not seem to be a credible explanation to me. However, if the mixture of business and political power is present, then things change.
For example, in the blog of Dr. Horowitz, he urges to investigate 'Dr. James S. Robertson, Englands leading bioengineer of flu viruses for the vaccine industry, and avid promoter of U.S. Government funding for lucrative biodefense contracts, along with collaborators at the US Centers for Disease Control & Prevention (CDC).'
Further, a video of a call from somebody in NY uploaded onto youtube on April 12th, argues that flu viruses were transported to US.
**
Also, I found out that the company that produces 'tamiflu' happens to be owned by almost all of Bush men. Secretary Runsfield is perhaps the most notorious of them all. Here I'll reproduce a report from 2005.
**
Rumsfeld's growing stake in Tamiflu
Defense Secretary, ex-chairman of flu treatment rights holder, sees portfolio value growing.
October 31, 2005: 10:55 AM EST
By Nelson D. Schwartz, Fortune senior writer
NEW YORK (Fortune) - The prospect of a bird flu outbreak may be panicking people around the globe, but it's proving to be very good news for Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and other politically connected investors in Gilead Sciences, the California biotech company that owns the rights to Tamiflu, the influenza remedy that's now the most-sought after drug in the world.
Rumsfeld served as Gilead (Research)'s chairman from 1997 until he joined the Bush administration in 2001, and he still holds a Gilead stake valued at between $5 million and $25 million, according to federal financial disclosures filed by Rumsfeld.
The forms don't reveal the exact number of shares Rumsfeld owns, but in the past six months fears of a pandemic and the ensuing scramble for Tamiflu have sent Gilead's stock from $35 to $47. That's made the Pentagon chief, already one of the wealthiest members of the Bush cabinet, at least $1 million richer.
Rumsfeld isn't the only political heavyweight benefiting from demand for Tamiflu, which is manufactured and marketed by Swiss pharma giant Roche. (Gilead receives a royalty from Roche equaling about 10% of sales.) Former Secretary of State George Shultz, who is on Gilead's board, has sold more than $7 million worth of Gilead since the beginning of 2005.
Another board member is the wife of former California Gov. Pete Wilson.
"I don't know of any biotech company that's so politically well-connected," says analyst Andrew McDonald of Think Equity Partners in San Francisco.
What's more, the federal government is emerging as one of the world's biggest customers for Tamiflu. In July, the Pentagon ordered $58 million worth of the treatment for U.S. troops around the world, and Congress is considering a multi-billion dollar purchase. Roche expects 2005 sales for Tamiflu to be about $1 billion, compared with $258 million in 2004.
Rumsfeld recused himself from any decisions involving Gilead when he left Gilead and became Secretary of Defense in early 2001. And late last month, notes a senior Pentagon official, Rumsfeld went even further and had the Pentagon's general counsel issue additional instructions outlining what he could and could not be involved in if there were an avian flu pandemic and the Pentagon had to respond.
As the flu issue heated up early this year, according to the Pentagon official, Rumsfeld considered unloading his entire Gilead stake and sought the advice of the Department of Justice, the SEC and the federal Office of Government Ethics.
Those agencies didn't offer an opinion so Rumsfeld consulted a private securities lawyer, who advised him that it was safer to hold on to the stock and be quite public about his recusal rather than sell and run the risk of being accused of trading on insider information, something Rumsfeld doesn't believe he possesses. So he's keeping his shares for the time being.
**
So, Ok,... there are few elements that allow me to be suspicious of this swine flu thing. However, all those elements are external to Mexican political reality. The question is what could possible happen for a president of a country (any country not only Mexico) to put international before national interests. I am sure that everybody loves their country and would do the best they can to protect their people and that it doesn't matter whether we are talking Mexico or China or Peru or any other country. Or at least that is what I would think.
But let's have a look at Mexican political arena for the last couple of years. and That, by the way is option B) the internal political situation and swine flu. And the question am addressing here is how B relates to A, or how the Mexican political situation relates to a breakout of a new virus and its realtion to the US new war strategy.
It does not seem a simple thing to understand. So we need to elaborate a bit for that the best way is to present a sort of events that have shaped Felipe Calderon's relationship with Mexicans.
1) Felipe Calderon and his party ran a presidential political campaign base on generating fear. They discualified Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador (AMLO) the leading candidate of being a 'Threat to Mexico', or in fact a more appropiate translation would be danger instead of thread. Most of what Calderon's campaign said about AMLO was based on imprecise information or plain lies.
here is one example,..
2) Vicente Fox used all the tricks in the book in order to support Calderon's campaign,.. although that is illegal under Mexican law,.. but it has been a common practice under PRI for 70 years or so,.. That explain how the institutions in charge of the elections didn't do anything to stop Calderon's propaganda.
here is a video of Fox, saying that 'it was important to stop AMLO
3) Calderon's brother in law Hildebrando was in charge of designing the software to be used to count the votes in the presidential election. Waste to say that votes had an extrange behaviour,.. where AMLO and Calderon's votes trends were an exact mirror. In otehr words, one vote less for AMLO was automatically one vote more for Calderon. In the end, there was not clarity who won,... the only option was to open the boxes with the votes and count by hand one by one,... of course Calderon and his supporters cried out that that was illegal,.. despite Mexican law allows that situation.
4) Calderon's big day,... was but a battle where he had to enter by the backdoor and be sorrounded by the secret police in order to swear in as president, despite HUGE demosntrations against him.
And just a few meters outside, there were huge demonstrations against Calderon,.. actually after the electoral fraud, a Mexican movement of Civil Resistance was formed and AMLO was elected as the legitimate president of Mexico. Even more worring for Calderon and his friends, AMLO supporters get toghether every now and then and organise protests,... criticise Calderon's acts of corruption and in short had become a real pain on the neck for the government.
A) US new war strategy, where biological weapons are used. That possibility is fueled by a document by the US air force 'air force 2025'. In that document it is predicted that by 2009 there was going to be an outbreak of influenza that would eventually kill some 30 million persons.
the link to such document is here
air force 2025
Especially the report tittled 'Alternate Futures for 2025: Security Planning to Avoid Surprise' in page 68 offers the schedule for the next 16 years of so,.. the whole planning process started back in 1996.
In page 67 it says that 'Technology could not solve some old problems, as in 2009, when an influenza pandemic struck in southern China, then rapidly spread worldwide.17 Three hundred-thirty million people were affected and over thirty million died.18 No one ever determined if the virus was a natural mutation or bioengineered.19
Many feared the latter.'
Then in the following page it presents a diagram where is clear that 2009 is the year influenza strikes. It also predicts that by 2010 UN would dissolve 'due to its inability ot resolve these issues and regional conflicts'
And here is a video with an enterview with Alfredo Jalife who is an expert in geopolitics,..
In addition, there are other voices claiming that the virus was produced in a laboratory somewhere in England, then transported to US and then planted in Mexico. Furthermore, they link pharmaceutical companies with the production of such a virus. Their aim is purely monetary. Mmaking their business grow and their profits does not seem to be a credible explanation to me. However, if the mixture of business and political power is present, then things change.
For example, in the blog of Dr. Horowitz, he urges to investigate 'Dr. James S. Robertson, Englands leading bioengineer of flu viruses for the vaccine industry, and avid promoter of U.S. Government funding for lucrative biodefense contracts, along with collaborators at the US Centers for Disease Control & Prevention (CDC).'
Further, a video of a call from somebody in NY uploaded onto youtube on April 12th, argues that flu viruses were transported to US.
**
Also, I found out that the company that produces 'tamiflu' happens to be owned by almost all of Bush men. Secretary Runsfield is perhaps the most notorious of them all. Here I'll reproduce a report from 2005.
**
Rumsfeld's growing stake in Tamiflu
Defense Secretary, ex-chairman of flu treatment rights holder, sees portfolio value growing.
October 31, 2005: 10:55 AM EST
By Nelson D. Schwartz, Fortune senior writer
NEW YORK (Fortune) - The prospect of a bird flu outbreak may be panicking people around the globe, but it's proving to be very good news for Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and other politically connected investors in Gilead Sciences, the California biotech company that owns the rights to Tamiflu, the influenza remedy that's now the most-sought after drug in the world.
Rumsfeld served as Gilead (Research)'s chairman from 1997 until he joined the Bush administration in 2001, and he still holds a Gilead stake valued at between $5 million and $25 million, according to federal financial disclosures filed by Rumsfeld.
The forms don't reveal the exact number of shares Rumsfeld owns, but in the past six months fears of a pandemic and the ensuing scramble for Tamiflu have sent Gilead's stock from $35 to $47. That's made the Pentagon chief, already one of the wealthiest members of the Bush cabinet, at least $1 million richer.
Rumsfeld isn't the only political heavyweight benefiting from demand for Tamiflu, which is manufactured and marketed by Swiss pharma giant Roche. (Gilead receives a royalty from Roche equaling about 10% of sales.) Former Secretary of State George Shultz, who is on Gilead's board, has sold more than $7 million worth of Gilead since the beginning of 2005.
Another board member is the wife of former California Gov. Pete Wilson.
"I don't know of any biotech company that's so politically well-connected," says analyst Andrew McDonald of Think Equity Partners in San Francisco.
What's more, the federal government is emerging as one of the world's biggest customers for Tamiflu. In July, the Pentagon ordered $58 million worth of the treatment for U.S. troops around the world, and Congress is considering a multi-billion dollar purchase. Roche expects 2005 sales for Tamiflu to be about $1 billion, compared with $258 million in 2004.
Rumsfeld recused himself from any decisions involving Gilead when he left Gilead and became Secretary of Defense in early 2001. And late last month, notes a senior Pentagon official, Rumsfeld went even further and had the Pentagon's general counsel issue additional instructions outlining what he could and could not be involved in if there were an avian flu pandemic and the Pentagon had to respond.
As the flu issue heated up early this year, according to the Pentagon official, Rumsfeld considered unloading his entire Gilead stake and sought the advice of the Department of Justice, the SEC and the federal Office of Government Ethics.
Those agencies didn't offer an opinion so Rumsfeld consulted a private securities lawyer, who advised him that it was safer to hold on to the stock and be quite public about his recusal rather than sell and run the risk of being accused of trading on insider information, something Rumsfeld doesn't believe he possesses. So he's keeping his shares for the time being.
**
So, Ok,... there are few elements that allow me to be suspicious of this swine flu thing. However, all those elements are external to Mexican political reality. The question is what could possible happen for a president of a country (any country not only Mexico) to put international before national interests. I am sure that everybody loves their country and would do the best they can to protect their people and that it doesn't matter whether we are talking Mexico or China or Peru or any other country. Or at least that is what I would think.
But let's have a look at Mexican political arena for the last couple of years. and That, by the way is option B) the internal political situation and swine flu. And the question am addressing here is how B relates to A, or how the Mexican political situation relates to a breakout of a new virus and its realtion to the US new war strategy.
It does not seem a simple thing to understand. So we need to elaborate a bit for that the best way is to present a sort of events that have shaped Felipe Calderon's relationship with Mexicans.
1) Felipe Calderon and his party ran a presidential political campaign base on generating fear. They discualified Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador (AMLO) the leading candidate of being a 'Threat to Mexico', or in fact a more appropiate translation would be danger instead of thread. Most of what Calderon's campaign said about AMLO was based on imprecise information or plain lies.
here is one example,..
2) Vicente Fox used all the tricks in the book in order to support Calderon's campaign,.. although that is illegal under Mexican law,.. but it has been a common practice under PRI for 70 years or so,.. That explain how the institutions in charge of the elections didn't do anything to stop Calderon's propaganda.
here is a video of Fox, saying that 'it was important to stop AMLO
3) Calderon's brother in law Hildebrando was in charge of designing the software to be used to count the votes in the presidential election. Waste to say that votes had an extrange behaviour,.. where AMLO and Calderon's votes trends were an exact mirror. In otehr words, one vote less for AMLO was automatically one vote more for Calderon. In the end, there was not clarity who won,... the only option was to open the boxes with the votes and count by hand one by one,... of course Calderon and his supporters cried out that that was illegal,.. despite Mexican law allows that situation.
4) Calderon's big day,... was but a battle where he had to enter by the backdoor and be sorrounded by the secret police in order to swear in as president, despite HUGE demosntrations against him.
And just a few meters outside, there were huge demonstrations against Calderon,.. actually after the electoral fraud, a Mexican movement of Civil Resistance was formed and AMLO was elected as the legitimate president of Mexico. Even more worring for Calderon and his friends, AMLO supporters get toghether every now and then and organise protests,... criticise Calderon's acts of corruption and in short had become a real pain on the neck for the government.
5) since Calderon arrival there have been some social movements. At some point it would appear that protesting-repressing has become a Mexican national sport,... and that any political manifestation has to go that way. Things are that deteriorated that the ruling party, Calderon's party keeps proposing to criminalise anyone who dares taking the streets to protest, even thogh it is a constitutional right. We have painful examples of that sort: Oaxaca, that we have briefly docuemnted in this blog, Atenco, Michoacan, Cananea, and a long long long etc.
6) Calderon's sent the army out on the streets to function as antinarcotics police force. But in reality it is functioning as a repressive force that with the excuse of fighting harcotics litmits citicenship. It is interesting how the country divides into two big drug cartels, on the one side 'el chapo Guzman' leading the federation [that's the name of what used to be the Sinaloa Cartel due to the fact that under Fox portection Guzman broke free from prison and organised the traffiking to the USA] and on the other hand is everthing else from 'los Zs' to 'la familia' and other small cartels. It is interesting to notice that the supposedly antinarcotics war focuses on fighting the small cartels but none of the figures of the federation are ever touched.
All those reasons, and others that I don't have in mind now, had made Calderon the most umpopular political figure in recent history. He doesn't even dares to go on the street without having to set a huge 'security' operative.
The magic formulae
Well but how this two things connect each other? how the US military strategy connects with Calderon's umpopularity?
My hupothesis is that they have every reason to be linked. I will describe what I think from the side of Calderon.
With these new virus, he has been able to STOP all their critics at once. Suddenly there are no more protertors on the street, the opposition in both chambers seem to be collaborative in the name of such terrible threat, they are supporting this new biological dictatorship,... or as Munoz Ledo said 'dictadura sanitaria'.
The prospect of the political campaigns are suddenly stopped, with IFE the electoral authority sharing TV time not with the political parties as it used to but with Calderon's health minister,...
World Insitutions are giving him money to face the emergency,.. World Bank and IMF have borrowed money to Mexican government,.. of course is to by 'tamiflu' only favouring only a a couple of companies that produce it, as I pointed out above.
So,.. for Calderon is a perfet world,... now they are saying that this emergency could last until the winter,.. due to, they say, the severity of the 'rebound effect'. All in all, it doesn't seem to me that the virus is a problem, but its political utilisation that seems to be favouring a few people at interantional level and Calderon and his political party at Mexican level.
Wednesday, April 29, 2009
the first victim of the swine flu,..
this is a link to a video from the bbc that is trying to trace down the first victim of the virus,.. it is in Oaxaca, and the victim was a 39 years old woman,..
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/8021947.stm
and this other video shows the very first infected from the flu,.. he is a little boy 5 year old,.. unlike the woman he survived and is fine,..
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/8024162.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/8021947.stm
and this other video shows the very first infected from the flu,.. he is a little boy 5 year old,.. unlike the woman he survived and is fine,..
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/8024162.stm
Mexico faces criticism over swine flu response
By NIKO PRICE, Associated Press Writer Niko Price, Associated Press Writer – Mon Apr 27, 7:57 pm ET
MEXICO CITY – Two weeks after the first known swine flu death, Mexico still hasn't given medicine to the families of the dead. It hasn't determined where the outbreak began or how it spread. And while the government urges anyone who feels sick to go to hospitals, feverish people complain ambulance workers are scared to pick them up.
A portrait is emerging of a slow and confused response by Mexico to the gathering swine flu epidemic. And that could mean the world is flying blind into a global health storm.
Despite an annual budget of more than $5 billion, Mexico's health secretary said Monday that his agency hasn't had the resources to visit the families of the dead. That means doctors haven't begun treatment for the population most exposed to swine flu, and most apt to spread it.
It also means medical sleuths don't know how the victims were infected — key to understanding how the epidemic began and how it can be contained.
Foreign health officials were hesitant Monday to speak critically about Mexico's response, saying they want to wait until more details emerge before passing judgment. But already, Mexicans were questioning the government's image of a country that has the crisis under control.
"Nobody believes the government anymore," said Edgar Rocha, a 28-year-old office messenger. He said the lack of information is sowing distrust: "You haven't seen a single interview with the sick!"
The political consequences could be serious. China was heavily criticized during the outbreak of SARS for failing to release details about the disease, feeding rumors and fear. And Mexico's failed response to a catastrophic 1985 earthquake is largely credited with the demise of the party that had ruled the country since the 1920s.
"That is foremost in the minds of Mexican policymakers now," said George Grayson at the College of William & Mary in Virginia. "They're thinking, 'We don't want another '85.'"
Indeed, Health Secretary Jose Angel Cordova was defensive at a news conference Monday as he was peppered with questions about why Mexico took so long to identify the outbreak, attempt to contain its spread and provide information.
"We never had this kind of epidemic in the world," he said. "This is the first time we have this kind of virus."
It remained unclear where and how the epidemic began, how it has spread, who it has killed or how fast it is growing. And the government has yet to take some basic steps critical to containing any outbreak, such as quick treatment of people who had contact with the victims.
In the town of Xonacatlan, just west of Mexico City, Antonia Cortes Borbolla told The Associated Press that nobody has given her medicine in the week since her husband succumbed to raging fever and weakened lungs that a lab has confirmed as swine flu.
No health workers have inspected her home, asked how her husband might have contracted the illness or tested the neighbors' pigs, she said.
Cordova acknowledged that her case isn't unique.
"We haven't given medicine to all of them because we still don't have enough personnel," he said.
Cordova said he couldn't provide information on the victims for reasons of confidentiality, but promised to eventually release a statistical breakdown. He said he couldn't provide that data now "because it's being processed."
Asked whether he could at least say how many of the 20 confirmed victims were men and how many were women, he said: "I don't have that information."
The government has insisted it acted quickly and decisively when presented with the evidence of a new virus.
But even as it did so, it acknowledged the outbreak began earlier than April 12, the date it had previously linked to the first case. Cordova confirmed Monday that a 4-year-old boy who was part of an outbreak in eastern Veracruz state that began in February had swine flu. He later recovered.
Residents of the town of Perote said at the time that they had a new, aggressive bug — even taking to the streets to demonstrate against the pig farm they blamed for their illness — but were told they were suffering from a typical flu. It was only after U.S. labs confirmed a swine flu outbreak that Mexican officials sent the boy's sample in for swine flu testing.
Meanwhile, some people complained that health workers were turning them away, even as officials urged people to seek treatment quickly if they felt symptoms of flu coming on.
Elias Camacho, a 31-year-old truck driver with fever, cough and body aches, was ordered out of a government ambulance Sunday because paramedics complained he might be contagious, his father-in-law told the AP. When family members took him to a hospital in a taxi, Jorge Martinez Cruz said, a doctor told him he wasn't sick.
Camacho was finally admitted to the hospital — and placed in an area marked "restricted" — after a doctor at a private clinic notified state health authorities, Martinez said.
In Mexico City, Jose Isaac Cepeda said two hospitals refused to treat his fever, diarrhea and joint pains. The first turned him away because he wasn't registered in the public health system, he said.
The second, he said, didn't let him in "because they say they're too busy."
___
Associated Press writers Olga Rodriguez in Xonacatlan and Peter Orsi and Lisa J. Adams in Mexico City contributed to this report.
***********
I agree with the version saying that government response has been ramdom and confusing,.. especially confusing is the information management, they don't even agree as to the number of persons infected with swine flu alone,.. the number of persosn that in addition to swine flu had illness,.. and their status of poverty.
It is somehow obvious that the poorest are the most vulnerable, but there is no information exactly as to how much,.. neither there is as to what exactly government is doing to reach the poor of the poor and prevent the virus from spreading.
World Health Organistaion just say that officially there are 7 cases of swine flu that had caused death,.. instead there is the impression that Mexican health minister is trying to cover some information,...
MEXICO CITY – Two weeks after the first known swine flu death, Mexico still hasn't given medicine to the families of the dead. It hasn't determined where the outbreak began or how it spread. And while the government urges anyone who feels sick to go to hospitals, feverish people complain ambulance workers are scared to pick them up.
A portrait is emerging of a slow and confused response by Mexico to the gathering swine flu epidemic. And that could mean the world is flying blind into a global health storm.
Despite an annual budget of more than $5 billion, Mexico's health secretary said Monday that his agency hasn't had the resources to visit the families of the dead. That means doctors haven't begun treatment for the population most exposed to swine flu, and most apt to spread it.
It also means medical sleuths don't know how the victims were infected — key to understanding how the epidemic began and how it can be contained.
Foreign health officials were hesitant Monday to speak critically about Mexico's response, saying they want to wait until more details emerge before passing judgment. But already, Mexicans were questioning the government's image of a country that has the crisis under control.
"Nobody believes the government anymore," said Edgar Rocha, a 28-year-old office messenger. He said the lack of information is sowing distrust: "You haven't seen a single interview with the sick!"
The political consequences could be serious. China was heavily criticized during the outbreak of SARS for failing to release details about the disease, feeding rumors and fear. And Mexico's failed response to a catastrophic 1985 earthquake is largely credited with the demise of the party that had ruled the country since the 1920s.
"That is foremost in the minds of Mexican policymakers now," said George Grayson at the College of William & Mary in Virginia. "They're thinking, 'We don't want another '85.'"
Indeed, Health Secretary Jose Angel Cordova was defensive at a news conference Monday as he was peppered with questions about why Mexico took so long to identify the outbreak, attempt to contain its spread and provide information.
"We never had this kind of epidemic in the world," he said. "This is the first time we have this kind of virus."
It remained unclear where and how the epidemic began, how it has spread, who it has killed or how fast it is growing. And the government has yet to take some basic steps critical to containing any outbreak, such as quick treatment of people who had contact with the victims.
In the town of Xonacatlan, just west of Mexico City, Antonia Cortes Borbolla told The Associated Press that nobody has given her medicine in the week since her husband succumbed to raging fever and weakened lungs that a lab has confirmed as swine flu.
No health workers have inspected her home, asked how her husband might have contracted the illness or tested the neighbors' pigs, she said.
Cordova acknowledged that her case isn't unique.
"We haven't given medicine to all of them because we still don't have enough personnel," he said.
Cordova said he couldn't provide information on the victims for reasons of confidentiality, but promised to eventually release a statistical breakdown. He said he couldn't provide that data now "because it's being processed."
Asked whether he could at least say how many of the 20 confirmed victims were men and how many were women, he said: "I don't have that information."
The government has insisted it acted quickly and decisively when presented with the evidence of a new virus.
But even as it did so, it acknowledged the outbreak began earlier than April 12, the date it had previously linked to the first case. Cordova confirmed Monday that a 4-year-old boy who was part of an outbreak in eastern Veracruz state that began in February had swine flu. He later recovered.
Residents of the town of Perote said at the time that they had a new, aggressive bug — even taking to the streets to demonstrate against the pig farm they blamed for their illness — but were told they were suffering from a typical flu. It was only after U.S. labs confirmed a swine flu outbreak that Mexican officials sent the boy's sample in for swine flu testing.
Meanwhile, some people complained that health workers were turning them away, even as officials urged people to seek treatment quickly if they felt symptoms of flu coming on.
Elias Camacho, a 31-year-old truck driver with fever, cough and body aches, was ordered out of a government ambulance Sunday because paramedics complained he might be contagious, his father-in-law told the AP. When family members took him to a hospital in a taxi, Jorge Martinez Cruz said, a doctor told him he wasn't sick.
Camacho was finally admitted to the hospital — and placed in an area marked "restricted" — after a doctor at a private clinic notified state health authorities, Martinez said.
In Mexico City, Jose Isaac Cepeda said two hospitals refused to treat his fever, diarrhea and joint pains. The first turned him away because he wasn't registered in the public health system, he said.
The second, he said, didn't let him in "because they say they're too busy."
___
Associated Press writers Olga Rodriguez in Xonacatlan and Peter Orsi and Lisa J. Adams in Mexico City contributed to this report.
***********
I agree with the version saying that government response has been ramdom and confusing,.. especially confusing is the information management, they don't even agree as to the number of persons infected with swine flu alone,.. the number of persosn that in addition to swine flu had illness,.. and their status of poverty.
It is somehow obvious that the poorest are the most vulnerable, but there is no information exactly as to how much,.. neither there is as to what exactly government is doing to reach the poor of the poor and prevent the virus from spreading.
World Health Organistaion just say that officially there are 7 cases of swine flu that had caused death,.. instead there is the impression that Mexican health minister is trying to cover some information,...
Now there is even a debate over the name of the damm flu,...
Israely health minister has complained about the terms 'swine' and prefer to call it Mexican flu,..
To be honest I don't care whether this new virus is call x or y. What I care is that the problem is controlled and it does not become a cause of death.
Wll the freethinker reports that some are uncomfortable with the term and now had openned a debate over how to call it. They propose, Mexican, Novel or i don't remember what else, but the fact is that the virus is not from Mexico. It was detected in the States and then it came down to Mexico where it supposedly had a deadly effect.
Just yesterday Mexican government said that about 150 persons have died, but today they recognised that out of those only 7 are confirmed to had that swine flu, the rest were suspected and also had other illnesses.
DON'T CALL IT SWINE FLU,...!!!
‘Don’t call it swine flu’ says Israeli health minister
WITH the outbreak of swine flu in Mexico, we were taking bets in the pub last night as to which Islamic country would be the first to demand that the viral condition be renamed so that it would not offend Muslims.
But guess what? No-one thought of Israel.
Today Deputy Health Minister Yakov Litzman, holding a press conference to update the public on developments regarding the epidemic in Israel, recommended that it be called “Mexican flu” rather than “swine flu”.
According to this report, only two Israelis are believed to have contracted swine Mexican flu. Tomer Vajim, 26, was admitted to the Laniado Hospital in Netanya after returning from Mexico with signs of the viral infection.
A second man who returned from Mexico on Sunday was admitted to the Meir Medical Center in Kfar Saba and put in isolation after exhibiting suspect symptoms, including fever and coughing.
******THE DEBATE,...
Debate rages over swine flu name
GENEVA (AFP) — Whether it is swine flu, "Mexican", "North American" or "novel", a debate is raging over the name for the type of influenza that is feared to have caused over 150 deaths in Mexico.
Farming and economic lobby groups have objected to the term swine flu, arguing that it could have a disastrous impact on pork sales and pig farmers even though the World Health Organisation has underlined that the virus cannot be caught by eating cooked or "properly handled" meat.
Brazilian pork producers on Tuesday asked the WHO to change the name to "North American flu" or even "Mexican flu" in order to avoid potentially huge losses for farmers and the meat processing industry as frightened consumers desert their produce.
The World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE) brought the debate to an official level on Monday, arguing that it was "not justified" to call it swine influenza because the virus had not been found in animals so far.
"The avian strain is of American origin, and of the two swine strains, one is American origin and the other appears to be Asian. The human strain is American," said Bernard Vallat, secretary general of the OIE.
"It would be really unfair to penalise pig farmers, who depend on their output for their livelihood, by talking about a risk which is not at all proven," said Vallat.
US officials were pondering the name as they tried to counter embargoes countries have imposed on pig imports from the United States.
"It's important to not refer to swine flu. It's important to convey the message that consuming pork will not cause this illness," Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack said.
Richard Besser, director of the US Centers for Disease Control acknowledged that there had been a fair amount of public misconception, adding, "and that's not helpful."
The OIE noted that past epidemics of human influenza epidemics with animal origin had been named after their geographical origin, such as Spanish flu or Asian flu.
But even that can cause difficulties.
Mexico, which is already facing a huge drop in tourism to its coastal resorts as some tour operators call off trips, protested after an Israeli government official suggested an alternative.
"We will use the term Mexican flu in order not to have to pronounce the word swine," Deputy Health Minister Yakov Litzman of the ultra-religious United Torah Judaism party said on Monday.
His government colleagues later dismissed the suggestion.
Eating of pork is prohibited by Judaism, the religion practised by the majority of Israelis. Islam, adhered to by most of Israel's Arab minority, likewise bans consumption of pork.
EU Commission is calling it "'novel flu virus' just to avoid the misunderstandings with the animal diseases because it costs a lot to the industry," said spokeswoman Nina Papadoulaki.
"In this case we have human-to-human transmission so it is a human virus not an animal disease."
However, the World Health Organization has not budged from "swine flu."
Assistant Director General Keiji Fukuda warned Tuesday that the naming of epidemics "can be very confusing."
"This epidemic started basically with that name and the virus that is identified is a swine influenza virus."
"Right now we do not have any plans to try to introduce any new names for this disease," he told journalists.
The WHO's "Frequently Asked Questions" on the swine influenza family says that "outbreaks in pigs occur year round" while "outbreaks and sporadic human infection with swine influenza have been occasionally reported."
Pigs, it noted, can also be infected with human and avian influenza.
****
And it seems to me that nobody is concern about offending Mexicans by labeling this virus 'Mexican flu',... Since I called Mexican flu before mainly due to my ignorance about the above,.. I appologise to any Mexican that could have felt offended,.. and promise to call it from now on, SWINE FLU,...
To be honest I don't care whether this new virus is call x or y. What I care is that the problem is controlled and it does not become a cause of death.
Wll the freethinker reports that some are uncomfortable with the term and now had openned a debate over how to call it. They propose, Mexican, Novel or i don't remember what else, but the fact is that the virus is not from Mexico. It was detected in the States and then it came down to Mexico where it supposedly had a deadly effect.
Just yesterday Mexican government said that about 150 persons have died, but today they recognised that out of those only 7 are confirmed to had that swine flu, the rest were suspected and also had other illnesses.
DON'T CALL IT SWINE FLU,...!!!
‘Don’t call it swine flu’ says Israeli health minister
WITH the outbreak of swine flu in Mexico, we were taking bets in the pub last night as to which Islamic country would be the first to demand that the viral condition be renamed so that it would not offend Muslims.
But guess what? No-one thought of Israel.
Today Deputy Health Minister Yakov Litzman, holding a press conference to update the public on developments regarding the epidemic in Israel, recommended that it be called “Mexican flu” rather than “swine flu”.
According to this report, only two Israelis are believed to have contracted swine Mexican flu. Tomer Vajim, 26, was admitted to the Laniado Hospital in Netanya after returning from Mexico with signs of the viral infection.
A second man who returned from Mexico on Sunday was admitted to the Meir Medical Center in Kfar Saba and put in isolation after exhibiting suspect symptoms, including fever and coughing.
******THE DEBATE,...
Debate rages over swine flu name
GENEVA (AFP) — Whether it is swine flu, "Mexican", "North American" or "novel", a debate is raging over the name for the type of influenza that is feared to have caused over 150 deaths in Mexico.
Farming and economic lobby groups have objected to the term swine flu, arguing that it could have a disastrous impact on pork sales and pig farmers even though the World Health Organisation has underlined that the virus cannot be caught by eating cooked or "properly handled" meat.
Brazilian pork producers on Tuesday asked the WHO to change the name to "North American flu" or even "Mexican flu" in order to avoid potentially huge losses for farmers and the meat processing industry as frightened consumers desert their produce.
The World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE) brought the debate to an official level on Monday, arguing that it was "not justified" to call it swine influenza because the virus had not been found in animals so far.
"The avian strain is of American origin, and of the two swine strains, one is American origin and the other appears to be Asian. The human strain is American," said Bernard Vallat, secretary general of the OIE.
"It would be really unfair to penalise pig farmers, who depend on their output for their livelihood, by talking about a risk which is not at all proven," said Vallat.
US officials were pondering the name as they tried to counter embargoes countries have imposed on pig imports from the United States.
"It's important to not refer to swine flu. It's important to convey the message that consuming pork will not cause this illness," Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack said.
Richard Besser, director of the US Centers for Disease Control acknowledged that there had been a fair amount of public misconception, adding, "and that's not helpful."
The OIE noted that past epidemics of human influenza epidemics with animal origin had been named after their geographical origin, such as Spanish flu or Asian flu.
But even that can cause difficulties.
Mexico, which is already facing a huge drop in tourism to its coastal resorts as some tour operators call off trips, protested after an Israeli government official suggested an alternative.
"We will use the term Mexican flu in order not to have to pronounce the word swine," Deputy Health Minister Yakov Litzman of the ultra-religious United Torah Judaism party said on Monday.
His government colleagues later dismissed the suggestion.
Eating of pork is prohibited by Judaism, the religion practised by the majority of Israelis. Islam, adhered to by most of Israel's Arab minority, likewise bans consumption of pork.
EU Commission is calling it "'novel flu virus' just to avoid the misunderstandings with the animal diseases because it costs a lot to the industry," said spokeswoman Nina Papadoulaki.
"In this case we have human-to-human transmission so it is a human virus not an animal disease."
However, the World Health Organization has not budged from "swine flu."
Assistant Director General Keiji Fukuda warned Tuesday that the naming of epidemics "can be very confusing."
"This epidemic started basically with that name and the virus that is identified is a swine influenza virus."
"Right now we do not have any plans to try to introduce any new names for this disease," he told journalists.
The WHO's "Frequently Asked Questions" on the swine influenza family says that "outbreaks in pigs occur year round" while "outbreaks and sporadic human infection with swine influenza have been occasionally reported."
Pigs, it noted, can also be infected with human and avian influenza.
****
And it seems to me that nobody is concern about offending Mexicans by labeling this virus 'Mexican flu',... Since I called Mexican flu before mainly due to my ignorance about the above,.. I appologise to any Mexican that could have felt offended,.. and promise to call it from now on, SWINE FLU,...
Mexican Flu,...
It has been a very noisy business. Mexican media and government keep saying that there is a huge problem and they insist in providing growing number of dead persons and the image of people covering their nose and mouth.
But somehow I don't fully believe their story. These are the reasons why:
1) Mexican government says that more than 100 persons have died, but the world health organisation is saying that those persons had also other illnesses.
2) In 2006 there was an exercise in which the scenario was that Mexico was hit by an unknown virus of influenza, here are the links to the exercise and a video that summarises it.
link
and here is the video
So there are some questions I have,... are the Mexican epidemiologists so capable so that they were able to predict an scenario of influenza and to design a strategy to contain it,... or there is something else?
if they have already considered that problem and consequently designed a strategy to prevent it from spreading,.. then why all the mistakes? why isn't there enough medicines?
3)this is also an electoral year,... and Mexican government, or rather Felipe Calderon is tanking every action to ensure his party remains in power.
For example, just few days ago tv channel 11, the public tv station, made major changes to its programming schedule. Among those changes, it moved some of the only opinion tv shows that were somehow independent to the political party in power. And i said somehow because despite being the only critic voice in the Mexican tv it was still soft with cases of government corruption. the program I am talking about is 'primer plano',...
That action pushes Mexican people to consume private tv opinion programs,.. in other words, there is no other choice but to consume Felipe Calderon's allies voice.
Now with the flu problem government advices NOT TO GET TOGETHER, so in fact political rallies and other major political events that are the opposition's only choice are banned.
In addition, the army stop for a moment fighting the narcotics,.. and instead now is fighting the flu,... they have the order to enter a House where any person suspected to be infected with the virus could hide. The question is why somebody who is ill would hide? and in fact that action goes against not only Mexican constitution but universal human rights,...
Of course am not saying that the virus does not exists,... but that Felipe Calderon's government is acting opportunistic and tries to take advantage of it positioning his political party that otherwise would completely loose next elections.
At global scale, perhaps this whole business of the Mexican flu just gives fresh air to the news of the financial crisis and the lack of leadership to solve the situation,... or perhaps is the actual kind of actions already agreed during g20 and that nobody knows about that are being covered.
here is an alternative explanation to the flu,.. although I am not so convinced of it,.. Could this be really happening?????
and here is a link to other video of Erick Pianka,.. a prominent Eugenetic
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lZJSJ9ilELM
No long ago, Mexican government recognised the usage of forced sterilization in 'undesireble groups' meaning indigenous,...
here is a note taken form
http://www.economista.com.mx/articulos/2006-02-22-8325
La delegación mexicana ante la ONU aseguró que la esterilización forzada no "corresponde en ningún caso a una política de Estado"; sin embargo, reconocen "que esas prácticas discriminatorias perduran y que es necesario combatirlas".
Si pasara lo mismo en los consultorios chilenos en la IX región... nos enteraríamos algún día?.. llega la prensa y la opinión pública hasta esos lugares?
Ginebra.- El Gobierno de México aseguró que la esterilización forzada de indígenas no ha sido ???jamás objeto de una práctica institucional??? en ese país y que tampoco ha formado parte de los programas de salud dirigidos a esa minoría, informaron hoy fuentes de las Naciones Unidas.
Durante la evaluación del informe de México al grupo de expertos de la ONU, la delegación oficial de ese país aseguró que la esterilización forzada no ???corresponde en ningún caso a una política de Estado??? y aseguró que todos los casos que fueron denunciados han sido objeto de investigación.
No obstante, señaló que ???las autoridades mexicanas reconocen que esas prácticas discriminatorias perduran y que es necesario combatirlas???.
En su primer periodo de sesiones del año, que se inició este lunes y concluirá el próximo 10 de marzo, el Comité examina los informes periódicos de trece países, entre los que están México, Guatemala y El Salvador.
El experto a cargo del caso de México, José Cali Tzay, dijo que había recibido informaciones que apuntan que las víctimas indígenas de esterilización forzada -hombres y mujeres- suelen abstenerse de presentar denuncias por temor a las represalias y a no recibir más atención médica.
Cali recordó que el derecho internacional considera esa práctica como ???un delito extremadamente grave???, al tiempo que dijo que las autoridades mexicanas parecen reconocer ahora su existencia, a pesar de haberla negado en el pasado.
Otro asunto abordado en el caso de México fue el referente a la discriminación que, en términos generales, sufren los grupos indígenas y afroamericanos.
Los primeros suman 12 millones de personas, mientras que los segundos son unos 450.000, respectivamente, lo que en total representa algo más del 10 por ciento de la población nacional.
De los 386 municipios considerados como los más marginados del país, 209 están mayoritariamente habitados por indígenas, indicó el presidente del Consejo Nacional para la Prevención de la Discriminación de México, Gilberto Rincón.
Sobre los indígenas de Chiapas, Cali sostuvo que ???todo parece indicar que la situación de esos pueblos no es única ni excepcional, pues todas las comunidades indígenas de México parecen vivir en condiciones similares??? de exclusión.
No obstante, la delegación mexicana afirmo que la situación de ese estado mexicano sí se puede considerar excepcional debido a que el alzamiento armado protagonizado por el Ejército Zapatista de Liberalización Nacional (EZLN) todavía no ha sido resuelto.
A ese respecto, señalaron que el diálogo entre el movimiento rebelde y el Gobierno está en un punto muerto, aunque no se ha roto.
*****
Again, Although I am not into conspiracy theories,.. it seems to me that there is something about eugenics that is been around for a while,..
More on Eugenics,...
part1
part2
Part3
But somehow I don't fully believe their story. These are the reasons why:
1) Mexican government says that more than 100 persons have died, but the world health organisation is saying that those persons had also other illnesses.
2) In 2006 there was an exercise in which the scenario was that Mexico was hit by an unknown virus of influenza, here are the links to the exercise and a video that summarises it.
link
and here is the video
So there are some questions I have,... are the Mexican epidemiologists so capable so that they were able to predict an scenario of influenza and to design a strategy to contain it,... or there is something else?
if they have already considered that problem and consequently designed a strategy to prevent it from spreading,.. then why all the mistakes? why isn't there enough medicines?
3)this is also an electoral year,... and Mexican government, or rather Felipe Calderon is tanking every action to ensure his party remains in power.
For example, just few days ago tv channel 11, the public tv station, made major changes to its programming schedule. Among those changes, it moved some of the only opinion tv shows that were somehow independent to the political party in power. And i said somehow because despite being the only critic voice in the Mexican tv it was still soft with cases of government corruption. the program I am talking about is 'primer plano',...
That action pushes Mexican people to consume private tv opinion programs,.. in other words, there is no other choice but to consume Felipe Calderon's allies voice.
Now with the flu problem government advices NOT TO GET TOGETHER, so in fact political rallies and other major political events that are the opposition's only choice are banned.
In addition, the army stop for a moment fighting the narcotics,.. and instead now is fighting the flu,... they have the order to enter a House where any person suspected to be infected with the virus could hide. The question is why somebody who is ill would hide? and in fact that action goes against not only Mexican constitution but universal human rights,...
Of course am not saying that the virus does not exists,... but that Felipe Calderon's government is acting opportunistic and tries to take advantage of it positioning his political party that otherwise would completely loose next elections.
At global scale, perhaps this whole business of the Mexican flu just gives fresh air to the news of the financial crisis and the lack of leadership to solve the situation,... or perhaps is the actual kind of actions already agreed during g20 and that nobody knows about that are being covered.
here is an alternative explanation to the flu,.. although I am not so convinced of it,.. Could this be really happening?????
and here is a link to other video of Erick Pianka,.. a prominent Eugenetic
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lZJSJ9ilELM
No long ago, Mexican government recognised the usage of forced sterilization in 'undesireble groups' meaning indigenous,...
here is a note taken form
http://www.economista.com.mx/articulos/2006-02-22-8325
La delegación mexicana ante la ONU aseguró que la esterilización forzada no "corresponde en ningún caso a una política de Estado"; sin embargo, reconocen "que esas prácticas discriminatorias perduran y que es necesario combatirlas".
Si pasara lo mismo en los consultorios chilenos en la IX región... nos enteraríamos algún día?.. llega la prensa y la opinión pública hasta esos lugares?
Ginebra.- El Gobierno de México aseguró que la esterilización forzada de indígenas no ha sido ???jamás objeto de una práctica institucional??? en ese país y que tampoco ha formado parte de los programas de salud dirigidos a esa minoría, informaron hoy fuentes de las Naciones Unidas.
Durante la evaluación del informe de México al grupo de expertos de la ONU, la delegación oficial de ese país aseguró que la esterilización forzada no ???corresponde en ningún caso a una política de Estado??? y aseguró que todos los casos que fueron denunciados han sido objeto de investigación.
No obstante, señaló que ???las autoridades mexicanas reconocen que esas prácticas discriminatorias perduran y que es necesario combatirlas???.
En su primer periodo de sesiones del año, que se inició este lunes y concluirá el próximo 10 de marzo, el Comité examina los informes periódicos de trece países, entre los que están México, Guatemala y El Salvador.
El experto a cargo del caso de México, José Cali Tzay, dijo que había recibido informaciones que apuntan que las víctimas indígenas de esterilización forzada -hombres y mujeres- suelen abstenerse de presentar denuncias por temor a las represalias y a no recibir más atención médica.
Cali recordó que el derecho internacional considera esa práctica como ???un delito extremadamente grave???, al tiempo que dijo que las autoridades mexicanas parecen reconocer ahora su existencia, a pesar de haberla negado en el pasado.
Otro asunto abordado en el caso de México fue el referente a la discriminación que, en términos generales, sufren los grupos indígenas y afroamericanos.
Los primeros suman 12 millones de personas, mientras que los segundos son unos 450.000, respectivamente, lo que en total representa algo más del 10 por ciento de la población nacional.
De los 386 municipios considerados como los más marginados del país, 209 están mayoritariamente habitados por indígenas, indicó el presidente del Consejo Nacional para la Prevención de la Discriminación de México, Gilberto Rincón.
Sobre los indígenas de Chiapas, Cali sostuvo que ???todo parece indicar que la situación de esos pueblos no es única ni excepcional, pues todas las comunidades indígenas de México parecen vivir en condiciones similares??? de exclusión.
No obstante, la delegación mexicana afirmo que la situación de ese estado mexicano sí se puede considerar excepcional debido a que el alzamiento armado protagonizado por el Ejército Zapatista de Liberalización Nacional (EZLN) todavía no ha sido resuelto.
A ese respecto, señalaron que el diálogo entre el movimiento rebelde y el Gobierno está en un punto muerto, aunque no se ha roto.
*****
Again, Although I am not into conspiracy theories,.. it seems to me that there is something about eugenics that is been around for a while,..
More on Eugenics,...
part1
part2
Part3
Friday, April 24, 2009
Otro ducumental sobre Oaxaca
Y otro documental mas sobre Oaxaca, la APPO y su lucha contra el gobierno de Ulises Ruiz. Gracias a Hazel quien me envio el link,
El realizador es Yinh Law. Este documental cuenta la historia de quienes con su musica apoyaron a la APPO. Esta muy interesante,...
El realizador es Yinh Law. Este documental cuenta la historia de quienes con su musica apoyaron a la APPO. Esta muy interesante,...
Wednesday, April 15, 2009
Mexican,... Texas,... Mexico,... MexTex,.. TexMex,.. Mexas,...Texican!,...
Some time ago, I read a book,... well to be honest I didn't complete it as it was rather boring. But the point is that the book was a bout a story that developed in Texas just after its anexation to the States, or in other words just after gringos invaded the land, killed the original owners, for then claim that Mexicans were a danger to their stability,.. (actually that is the sort of line they always use to invade and steal from other countries),...
The problem was that due to geographical and historical reasons gringos in Texas couldn't get rid of Mexican population,...and against their purposes population mixed and more importantly, a light version of Mexican culture prevailed,.. in that book the author called 'Texicans', which was a way of saying that neither of the two cultures dominated each other but they mixed together and were, in a way, inseparable.
So far, so good,... now Burger King is launching a campaign for their new burger,.. the Texican,.. which actually tastes exactly the same than the others [horrible in its versions with/without chile]and also they used a dwarf-like brown actor who dresses the flag and uses a wrestling mask. Which is not original really, it remind me a version of ‘NACHO LIBRE’. On the other hand, the gringo,.. well is just a cowboy gringo,…
The situation is that Mexican politicians made waves by complaining about the usage of the Mexican stereotype. So, ok they are not happy about that. They say is offensive and degrading towards Mexican image.
Of course I somehow agree with that statement. And I also agree that Burger King should not use stereotypes as is offensive. But what bothers me is not the fact that the stereotype exists, as there is little one could do about it; but the racism implicit in it, and it has little to do with Mexicans only.
Else, Mexican government of the last 8 years which was supposed to be the government that changed old practices, is composed by members of the ‘Partido Accion Nacional’ the ultra right wing party. This party has used racism constantly within the electoral campaigns. Moreover, affiliates to that party always behave in a way that in reality creates a system that divides: an apartheid.
At grass level this system holds onto a mixture of racism and classism where by being short and brown people are considered to be inferior with less political rights, their role in society is to obey, and pay. On the contrary, European types are considered by themselves with the natural right to govern,… waste to say that much of the corruption starts just there. Contradictorily, the vast majority of Mexicans are brown ‘mestizo’ and before the eyes of outsiders they all look the same.
This following video is just a sample of how that division actually works, there is a group of demonstrators who are supporting Andres Manuel lopez Obrador, they are passing by and a woman whose political preference is PAN (It is inferred by the stamp on the windscreen of her car) started shouting at them, she uses all the racism she can, and then ask the police to support her against the protestors,…
So, Mexican government should make sure that racism is ended among them first, and then perhaps could ask everyone else to do so.
All this make me think about consuming pizza instead,... but after further consideration I ruled that option out as well,.. and the reasons,.. well,... here are some of them,..
reson1
reson 2
more reasons at:
http://thisis50.com/profiles/blogs/the-reason-why-you-will-never
The problem was that due to geographical and historical reasons gringos in Texas couldn't get rid of Mexican population,...and against their purposes population mixed and more importantly, a light version of Mexican culture prevailed,.. in that book the author called 'Texicans', which was a way of saying that neither of the two cultures dominated each other but they mixed together and were, in a way, inseparable.
So far, so good,... now Burger King is launching a campaign for their new burger,.. the Texican,.. which actually tastes exactly the same than the others [horrible in its versions with/without chile]and also they used a dwarf-like brown actor who dresses the flag and uses a wrestling mask. Which is not original really, it remind me a version of ‘NACHO LIBRE’. On the other hand, the gringo,.. well is just a cowboy gringo,…
The situation is that Mexican politicians made waves by complaining about the usage of the Mexican stereotype. So, ok they are not happy about that. They say is offensive and degrading towards Mexican image.
Of course I somehow agree with that statement. And I also agree that Burger King should not use stereotypes as is offensive. But what bothers me is not the fact that the stereotype exists, as there is little one could do about it; but the racism implicit in it, and it has little to do with Mexicans only.
Else, Mexican government of the last 8 years which was supposed to be the government that changed old practices, is composed by members of the ‘Partido Accion Nacional’ the ultra right wing party. This party has used racism constantly within the electoral campaigns. Moreover, affiliates to that party always behave in a way that in reality creates a system that divides: an apartheid.
At grass level this system holds onto a mixture of racism and classism where by being short and brown people are considered to be inferior with less political rights, their role in society is to obey, and pay. On the contrary, European types are considered by themselves with the natural right to govern,… waste to say that much of the corruption starts just there. Contradictorily, the vast majority of Mexicans are brown ‘mestizo’ and before the eyes of outsiders they all look the same.
This following video is just a sample of how that division actually works, there is a group of demonstrators who are supporting Andres Manuel lopez Obrador, they are passing by and a woman whose political preference is PAN (It is inferred by the stamp on the windscreen of her car) started shouting at them, she uses all the racism she can, and then ask the police to support her against the protestors,…
So, Mexican government should make sure that racism is ended among them first, and then perhaps could ask everyone else to do so.
All this make me think about consuming pizza instead,... but after further consideration I ruled that option out as well,.. and the reasons,.. well,... here are some of them,..
reson1
reson 2
more reasons at:
http://thisis50.com/profiles/blogs/the-reason-why-you-will-never
some few issues,..
After a long,.. long,.. long,.. period of inactivity; I decided to come back and start reporting about what is happening in Mexico and other issues. So I ssupose I could start by noticing that Obama is coming to town,... and of course Mexico City is upside down. Well I'll report about it later on, now I want ot comment on a docuemtary I saw last night in channel 4 (I think).
It is a following up documentary of father Oliver O'grady, who raped a huge number of children in the States, was jailed for about 8 years, and now is free in Ireland. Few posts ago I uploaded another docuemntary about his story and how he was protected by the Vatican,.. well this latter one shows the struggle of some of the victims in their search for justice.
here is the docuemtnary,..
Well I think that is a well known story elsewhere,.. in Mexico Cardinal Norberto Rivera has covered some of these cases and was also accused in the States but unlike Cardinal Royer Mahony the court found itselft with no jurisdiction to bring him to court.
It is a following up documentary of father Oliver O'grady, who raped a huge number of children in the States, was jailed for about 8 years, and now is free in Ireland. Few posts ago I uploaded another docuemntary about his story and how he was protected by the Vatican,.. well this latter one shows the struggle of some of the victims in their search for justice.
here is the docuemtnary,..
Well I think that is a well known story elsewhere,.. in Mexico Cardinal Norberto Rivera has covered some of these cases and was also accused in the States but unlike Cardinal Royer Mahony the court found itselft with no jurisdiction to bring him to court.
Sunday, June 29, 2008
New video of Zaachila, and the gunman,...
This new video shows with more clarity the guy who is shooting at APPO.
It is clear, to me that pri supporters have little to say before the evidence,.. although they just don't care,...
It is clear, to me that pri supporters have little to say before the evidence,.. although they just don't care,...
Monday, June 23, 2008
APPO and PRIistas Clash in Zaachila, Oaxaca
by Eliza Ruiz Jaimes, translated by Kristin Bricker
Noticias Voz e Imagen de Oaxaca, June 21, 2008
Supporters of the Popular Assembly of the Peoples of Oaxaca (APPO in its Spanish initials) were hit with rocks thrown by a group of thugs hired by the municipal president of Zaachila, Noe Pérez Martínez, as well as municipal police, who used stones, firecrackers, and firearms.
With barricades, residents prevented the state governor, Ulises Ruiz Ortiz (URO), from entering the community, where he was supposed to tour.
The protesters accused Natalio Pérez Tomás--father of the current municipal president--of having fired a weapon: "He fired directly at the crowd, fortunately he didn't hurt anyone." The tension between the groups was brought under control after assistant Secretary of State Joaquín Rodríguez Palacios' appeal to the APPO to control itself.
The governor had to cancel the signing of the State-Municipal agreement and the start of public works in the municipality. Various people were wounded during the violence, including Asrael Torres Carmona, 71 years old, who believes that the repressive force is concentrated in the Party of the Institutional Revolution (PRI in its Spanish initials).
In agreement with Jorge Aragón Martínez, the assistant secretary admitted that the PRIista group was the one who initiated the confrontation. According to him no police force intervened in the clashes, despite the fact that on Thursday dozens of members of the Police Unit for Special Operations (UPOE in its Spanish initials) roamed the streets and installed metal fences in an attempt to impede the demonstrators' passage.
In response, the main roads into downtown Zaachila were closed with burning logs, tires, and rearranged metal fences, grabbed by residents and members of David "El Alebrije" Venegas' collective, who was present during the protest against the governor.
The governor's event was scheduled for 12:00pm yesterday, but it couldn't happen due to the protests of the residents with Zapoteca roots. They met in and around the Municipal Palace in order to keep Ruiz Ortiz from appearing in the community.
The APPO supporters said the government was overconfident because Jorge "El Chucky" Franco Vargas, the current leader of the PRI, arrived to put down the protest against the new municipal leader of the PRI, "but here we aren't going to let in any repressors."
The bandanas returned to cover the faces of protest. The stones returned to be defensive weapons together with firecrackers and chants against URO. The demonstrators warned that the fact that they "tolerate" the government that Pérez Martínez represents doesn't mean that they forgive Ruiz Ortiz's actions in their community. "The struggle continues."
The people who were wounded with cuts and scrapes after the violence in la Villa are considering bringing charges. The residents' assembly will determine the next steps and the stance against the ruler. According to the APPO, Pérez Martínez doesn't represent them: "we will go before the State Congress to request the removal of that repressor," they warned.
******
As usual, Ulises and most media, local and national have avoided to mention that pri supporters fired at APPO. Next video is a report on national television, and there is no mention of the shooting,...
but there is another video that CLEARLY shows a guy who had been identified as pri-supporter, shooting at people. Furthermore that guy has been also identified as Natalio Pérez Tomás,... here is the video,..
Let's remember that Zaachila was declared autonomous and there is a governing committee that APPO formed two years ago (I think,..), and that there is a parallel government (the 'official') run by priistas,.. Like the country as a whole, Zaachila has two governments, one by the people (the legitimate) and one imposed by electoral insitutions (the official).
Noticias Voz e Imagen de Oaxaca, June 21, 2008
Supporters of the Popular Assembly of the Peoples of Oaxaca (APPO in its Spanish initials) were hit with rocks thrown by a group of thugs hired by the municipal president of Zaachila, Noe Pérez Martínez, as well as municipal police, who used stones, firecrackers, and firearms.
With barricades, residents prevented the state governor, Ulises Ruiz Ortiz (URO), from entering the community, where he was supposed to tour.
The protesters accused Natalio Pérez Tomás--father of the current municipal president--of having fired a weapon: "He fired directly at the crowd, fortunately he didn't hurt anyone." The tension between the groups was brought under control after assistant Secretary of State Joaquín Rodríguez Palacios' appeal to the APPO to control itself.
The governor had to cancel the signing of the State-Municipal agreement and the start of public works in the municipality. Various people were wounded during the violence, including Asrael Torres Carmona, 71 years old, who believes that the repressive force is concentrated in the Party of the Institutional Revolution (PRI in its Spanish initials).
In agreement with Jorge Aragón Martínez, the assistant secretary admitted that the PRIista group was the one who initiated the confrontation. According to him no police force intervened in the clashes, despite the fact that on Thursday dozens of members of the Police Unit for Special Operations (UPOE in its Spanish initials) roamed the streets and installed metal fences in an attempt to impede the demonstrators' passage.
In response, the main roads into downtown Zaachila were closed with burning logs, tires, and rearranged metal fences, grabbed by residents and members of David "El Alebrije" Venegas' collective, who was present during the protest against the governor.
The governor's event was scheduled for 12:00pm yesterday, but it couldn't happen due to the protests of the residents with Zapoteca roots. They met in and around the Municipal Palace in order to keep Ruiz Ortiz from appearing in the community.
The APPO supporters said the government was overconfident because Jorge "El Chucky" Franco Vargas, the current leader of the PRI, arrived to put down the protest against the new municipal leader of the PRI, "but here we aren't going to let in any repressors."
The bandanas returned to cover the faces of protest. The stones returned to be defensive weapons together with firecrackers and chants against URO. The demonstrators warned that the fact that they "tolerate" the government that Pérez Martínez represents doesn't mean that they forgive Ruiz Ortiz's actions in their community. "The struggle continues."
The people who were wounded with cuts and scrapes after the violence in la Villa are considering bringing charges. The residents' assembly will determine the next steps and the stance against the ruler. According to the APPO, Pérez Martínez doesn't represent them: "we will go before the State Congress to request the removal of that repressor," they warned.
******
As usual, Ulises and most media, local and national have avoided to mention that pri supporters fired at APPO. Next video is a report on national television, and there is no mention of the shooting,...
but there is another video that CLEARLY shows a guy who had been identified as pri-supporter, shooting at people. Furthermore that guy has been also identified as Natalio Pérez Tomás,... here is the video,..
Let's remember that Zaachila was declared autonomous and there is a governing committee that APPO formed two years ago (I think,..), and that there is a parallel government (the 'official') run by priistas,.. Like the country as a whole, Zaachila has two governments, one by the people (the legitimate) and one imposed by electoral insitutions (the official).
Tuesday, June 17, 2008
Sobre la columna de Federico Arreola en el sdp del lunes 16 de junio
Cachondean a Calderón en España
Recibí una carta de un amigo de Madrid que trabaja muy cerca de la casa del embajador mexicano:
“Hoy vino Calderón a la casa del embajador... Pasó enfrente de mí. Iba en un coche de colección negro, y atrás marchaban, en fila, unos 20 Audis A6 nuevos, que le puso el gobierno español para sus acompañantes.
También vi varios Mercedes.
No exagero... Y unas 10 motos. La gente del vecindario, espantada de plano. Una señora no podía creer lo que veía, ya que en Madrid todos hemos visto pasar al Rey alguna vez y nunca ha traído un contingente tan impresionante.
El carro negro es un Rolls Royce que el Rey usa una vez al año. Nada más en el desfile militar.
No recuerdo haber visto a ninguna otra persona en ese automóvil. Excepto a Francisco Franco, ya que fue un regalo que le hicieron al dictador que terminó por quedarse el Rey. Había también un helicóptero sobrevolando al área. No faltaron las ambulancias y las motos Harleys rodeando al Rolls Royce.
Patrulleros por delante y por atrás. Etcétera. Y ya ves, antes el Rey había cachondeado
a Calderón y Zapatero también.
Otros políticos de los dos partidos se esmeraron en hacerlo sentir importante. Ni duda cabe, cuánta falta nos está haciendo a los españoles el petróleo mexicano. Para eso hemos enamorado a Calderón, que se ve cayó redondo en nuestra trampa de seducción. Pobres mexicanos, qué complejo de inferioridad tienen”.
Sobre la columna de Federico Arreola en el sdp del lunes 16 de junio
El que un presidente (espurio o no) vaya a otro país a ser ‘cachondeado’ creo que no tiene mucho que ver con los complejos y traumas que tenga la población a la que dice representar.
Yo le sugeriría al buen Arreola, que si es cierto que es vergonzosa la actuación de Felipe Calderón y algunos de sus funcionarios en el extranjero. Hacen uso exagerado de lujos y gastos que no corresponden con un país que se supone esta apenas desarrollándose.
Pero también le diría a su amigo, el español, que no se podía esperar otra cosa del heredero del fascismo y amante de los ‘buenos negocios’ Juan Carlos I. No es nuevo saber que el rey tiene el gusto muy desarrollado por los negocios. Por ello tal vez no sea gratis la publicación del libro ‘Juan Carlos I: ’30 años a cuerpo de rey’ donde se relatan hechos que describen a un hombre un tanto corrupto, prepotente, y bastante fascista.
Se dice que cuando ilegítimamente heredo el trono, no tenía dinero. Que su fortuna la hizo con negocios a la sombra de la figura real, usando su poder para ‘agilizar’ proyectos, también pidió dinero prestado (10 millones de euros) que pago permitiendo el uso del territorio español como base de lanzamiento en las guerras de Irak.
Ahora bien, Juan Carlos solo hizo lo que ha venido haciendo desde hace tres décadas tanto a españoles como a extranjeros: aseguro su participación en un negocio más. Que le prestó su coche personal y 20 mas a Calderón, si. Que Calderón es un hombre pequeño que se impresiona fácilmente y que con un poco de protocolo oficial y ‘cachondeo’ no duda en entregar el petróleo, también. Pero y que culpa tenemos el resto de los Mexicanos para que el amigo de Arreola nos diga que tenemos complejo de inferioridad?
En todo caso, Calderón es el que tiene el complejo de inferioridad, y en eso estamos completamente de acuerdo. Como lo estará él con el hecho de que Juan Carlos es un corrupto al que no le importa usar la soberanía española ni la vida de los soldados españoles con tal de obtener ganancias. Que canchondeo a Calderón, yo diría que es un asunto de ilegítimos.
ahi van unos videitos para recordar quien es juan carlos,...
como hizo su fortuna 'el rey'
y claro,.. el rey tambien tiene sus 'defensores' claro quien va a ser,... sino los medios de comunicacion,...
y sobre la 'transicion del franquismo al carlismo,.. y la cia (????) que echa por tierra el discursito democratico de juan carlos,..
Yo no se que puedan hacer los espanholes para controlar a su 'rey' en sus ansias por dinero,.. pero voy a mandar una carta a los diputados en Mexico para que ademas de darle permiso a Calderon de viajar al extranjero,.. que lo obligen a usar cinturon de castidad,.. para evitar futuros 'cachondeos',...
Recibí una carta de un amigo de Madrid que trabaja muy cerca de la casa del embajador mexicano:
“Hoy vino Calderón a la casa del embajador... Pasó enfrente de mí. Iba en un coche de colección negro, y atrás marchaban, en fila, unos 20 Audis A6 nuevos, que le puso el gobierno español para sus acompañantes.
También vi varios Mercedes.
No exagero... Y unas 10 motos. La gente del vecindario, espantada de plano. Una señora no podía creer lo que veía, ya que en Madrid todos hemos visto pasar al Rey alguna vez y nunca ha traído un contingente tan impresionante.
El carro negro es un Rolls Royce que el Rey usa una vez al año. Nada más en el desfile militar.
No recuerdo haber visto a ninguna otra persona en ese automóvil. Excepto a Francisco Franco, ya que fue un regalo que le hicieron al dictador que terminó por quedarse el Rey. Había también un helicóptero sobrevolando al área. No faltaron las ambulancias y las motos Harleys rodeando al Rolls Royce.
Patrulleros por delante y por atrás. Etcétera. Y ya ves, antes el Rey había cachondeado
a Calderón y Zapatero también.
Otros políticos de los dos partidos se esmeraron en hacerlo sentir importante. Ni duda cabe, cuánta falta nos está haciendo a los españoles el petróleo mexicano. Para eso hemos enamorado a Calderón, que se ve cayó redondo en nuestra trampa de seducción. Pobres mexicanos, qué complejo de inferioridad tienen”.
Sobre la columna de Federico Arreola en el sdp del lunes 16 de junio
El que un presidente (espurio o no) vaya a otro país a ser ‘cachondeado’ creo que no tiene mucho que ver con los complejos y traumas que tenga la población a la que dice representar.
Yo le sugeriría al buen Arreola, que si es cierto que es vergonzosa la actuación de Felipe Calderón y algunos de sus funcionarios en el extranjero. Hacen uso exagerado de lujos y gastos que no corresponden con un país que se supone esta apenas desarrollándose.
Pero también le diría a su amigo, el español, que no se podía esperar otra cosa del heredero del fascismo y amante de los ‘buenos negocios’ Juan Carlos I. No es nuevo saber que el rey tiene el gusto muy desarrollado por los negocios. Por ello tal vez no sea gratis la publicación del libro ‘Juan Carlos I: ’30 años a cuerpo de rey’ donde se relatan hechos que describen a un hombre un tanto corrupto, prepotente, y bastante fascista.
Se dice que cuando ilegítimamente heredo el trono, no tenía dinero. Que su fortuna la hizo con negocios a la sombra de la figura real, usando su poder para ‘agilizar’ proyectos, también pidió dinero prestado (10 millones de euros) que pago permitiendo el uso del territorio español como base de lanzamiento en las guerras de Irak.
Ahora bien, Juan Carlos solo hizo lo que ha venido haciendo desde hace tres décadas tanto a españoles como a extranjeros: aseguro su participación en un negocio más. Que le prestó su coche personal y 20 mas a Calderón, si. Que Calderón es un hombre pequeño que se impresiona fácilmente y que con un poco de protocolo oficial y ‘cachondeo’ no duda en entregar el petróleo, también. Pero y que culpa tenemos el resto de los Mexicanos para que el amigo de Arreola nos diga que tenemos complejo de inferioridad?
En todo caso, Calderón es el que tiene el complejo de inferioridad, y en eso estamos completamente de acuerdo. Como lo estará él con el hecho de que Juan Carlos es un corrupto al que no le importa usar la soberanía española ni la vida de los soldados españoles con tal de obtener ganancias. Que canchondeo a Calderón, yo diría que es un asunto de ilegítimos.
ahi van unos videitos para recordar quien es juan carlos,...
como hizo su fortuna 'el rey'
y claro,.. el rey tambien tiene sus 'defensores' claro quien va a ser,... sino los medios de comunicacion,...
y sobre la 'transicion del franquismo al carlismo,.. y la cia (????) que echa por tierra el discursito democratico de juan carlos,..
Yo no se que puedan hacer los espanholes para controlar a su 'rey' en sus ansias por dinero,.. pero voy a mandar una carta a los diputados en Mexico para que ademas de darle permiso a Calderon de viajar al extranjero,.. que lo obligen a usar cinturon de castidad,.. para evitar futuros 'cachondeos',...
Monday, May 19, 2008
Some questions and answers about the oil and the political battle to secure it
Is energy security a political, military or market problem?
Developed nations are facing a severe energy security crisis, according to many analysts. And at the heart of energy security are many of the most important political, economic and environmental questions facing the world.
Perennial tensions in the Middle East affect oil supplies. Russia falls out with its neighbours over the supply of gas. Stark warnings of environmental catastrophes demand big changes to energy use. Nuclear power is clearly back on the agenda in some nations.
However, Cambridge University’s Pierre Noël, argues in the FT that the increasing use of energy resources as political tools does not in fact justify a tough new paradigm for energy security policy. He argues that ensuring a free global market in energy is the best line of defence.
So what are the biggest energy security challenges for the world? And what are the best solutions? What, for example, is the role of energy hungry China? How should the European Union deal with Russia?
Our thanks to Dr Noël for answering these questions on Thursday, 17 January 2008.
............................................................................................................................................
’Energy Security’ has become a very frequently used term, but it also seems to be one of the most poorly defined. If we assume that a useful definition goes beyond the assumption that states who have energy are ’secure’ and states that don’t are not, what can you offer by way of a definition of Energy Security, and what are its key dimensions?Iain Grant, Alberta, Canada
Pierre Noël: The most popular definition of energy security mentions the ‘availability’ of energy, its ‘affordability’ and often its ‘environmental sustainability’. This is not a very useful definition.
Affordability is a relative notion: affordable to whom and to do what? Furthermore, energy commodities become less affordable when markets are tight, but that is the very condition for them to remain available. Adding environmental sustainability is not helpful because most of the time there is a clear tradeoff between the ‘affordability’ of energy and its environmental impact.
Clean energy is relatively expensive.
I would advocate a narrow definition of energy security, centered on the availability of energy to those who are willing to pay the market price. Energy insecurity can then be linked to situations when energy markets do not function properly. Energy security policies should be mostly aimed at ‘making markets work’ and letting them work when they do.
............................................................................................................................................
Who will get the last barrel of oil? The country the oil is extracted from, the country with the most money, or the country with the most weapons?Wayne Rogers, Canada
Pierre Noël: There will be many ‘last barrels’ consumed at the same time, probably by relatively poor people in relatively poor countries – some of them extracting oil.
............................................................................................................................................
Is the American policy of projecting military might across the oil-rich Persian Gulf and its support for reactionary governments in the region misguided? After all, even the most hot-headed revolutionaries in the region still need to export oil to survive so there is no meaningful threat to the west’s energy security, whereas the US policies ensure that democracy and pluralism will not take root in the area. Borzou Aram, London
Pierre Noël: Protecting the flow of oil to the world market probably does not require a permanent, massive US military presence in the Gulf. Some in Washington are openly talking about moving back to an “over the horizon” military posture.
The US has long acted as a policeman in the Middle East, simply deterring the “bad guys” (Iran, then Iraq) from unsettling the status quo. When deterrence failed with Saddam Hussein in 1990, the US did not hesitate to send massive military power to the region. Under GW Bush the policy has changed radically as the US has transformed itself into a political engineer in the Middle East, trying to re-draw the political and ideological map of the region.
This policy shift was certainly not required in terms of energy security and it has had negative energy security consequences – not only for the US but for all consumers.
............................................................................................................................................
Are Europe-based energy sources like wind and nuclear bringing more or less security of supply? Jean-Michel Glachant, University Paris Sud, France
Pierre Noël: Wind is an intermittent source of power supply, unpredictable and relatively concentrated geographically (Scotland in the UK example). Massively increasing the share of wind in the electricity mix, as Europe and the UK want to do, almost certainly decreases energy security (or, which is the same thing, increases the cost of maintaining the reliability of the electricity system).
Nuclear is probably neutral in terms of energy security compared to other non-intermittent sources (coal, natural gas).
The fact that wind and nuclear are ‘non-imported’ sources of energy is irrelevant as far as energy security is concerned.
............................................................................................................................................
There is a view that the current spike in energy prices is here to stay, at least for 5-10 years, due to underinvestment in oil and gas production infrastructure. Do you see this current period of high prices being different to those in the past in that they are stimulating a significant shift to alternative energy sources or will oil remain the main source of energy? If so, what do you see being the dominant trends in energy production? Adam Keats, London
Pierre Noël: I will not try to predict the price of oil! That said, the current period of high prices is clearly different from previous periods. Production outside OPEC and the Former Soviet Union has stopped growing, despite five full years of very high prices and record investment budgets from oil companies. It is probably very close to its maximum possible production. In that context, growing demand has come and ‘bumped up’ against production capacities in the Middle East, sending prices to the current levels.
If anything it will be more difficult, not less, to shift to alternatives this time. The 1970s oil shocks had triggered massive substitution, especially in the power generation and industrial sectors. Some of that might be replicable – at a cost – in developing countries, especially Asian emerging economies. But in the OECD oil demand is now highly concentrated in the transportation sector where price elasticities are low.
............................................................................................................................................
The current global energy market is anything but free. The biggest cartel in the history of market economy prevents national governments from responding with free market measures. Do you believe a free global market can exist with the presence of OPEC? Zhou Xi, Hong Kong
Pierre Noël: No market is perfect and the oil market works much, much better than most. All other things being equal, the price would be lower without OPEC, no doubt. But OPEC is here to stay and its market power is bound to increase with the peak in non-OPEC supply.
The relevant policy question is: ‘What should we as oil consumers do to ensure the highest possible level of energy security?’ The answer is:
1. Let the market work freely, always.
2. Maintain emergency storage
3. Invest in R&D for alternative transportation technologies and fuels.
The most important is No. 1.
............................................................................................................................................
Is it possible to calculate the cost in dollars per barrel of securing oil supply through US military intervention in the Mideast Gulf since the first Gulf crisis in 1990-91? Is this a wise foreign policy, and does it make the Pentagon the source of US energy policy rather than the Department of Energy? Ian Bourne, London
Pierre Noël: Academic studies have consistently valued the ‘energy security premium’ at between zero and $0.33/gallon. The price in the US is currently around $3/gallon.
Most of the US military presence in the Middle East is not required to protect the oil market.
............................................................................................................................................
Do you believe that we are living in a time of constricting oil supply based on the Hubbert Peak theory? Ambrose
Pierre Noël: I believe that oil supply will eventually peak. As it continues to grow, by definition it has not peaked yet!
............................................................................................................................................
What options do developing countries have in the future if US, Europe and others impose restrictions on the imports from the countries with no regulations on GHG emission reductions and force developing countries to adopt ’costly’ clean energy options, restricting power generation from cheap and abundantly available coal for their energy security? Hari, Auckland
Pierre Noël: Such taxes would increase the price of imported goods in developed countries (cheap Chinese goods would become a bit more expensive). I doubt it would significantly accelerate the transition of China towards a cleaner energy economy. But these taxes might be welcomed by European and American manufacturers.
............................................................................................................................................
In the case of China, for example, national oil companies are increasingly driven by government agenda to seek resources elsewhere, almost making oil deals into government diplomatic exchanges instead of business transactions. With China’s growing influence, do you believe that re-nationalisation of this sector is inevitable? Zhou Xi, Hong Kong
Pierre Noël: Chinese oil companies seem already to enjoy significant – though far from complete -- strategic autonomy, and will probably enjoy more in the future. They try to build portfolios of assets outside China and they go first where there is relatively less competition (places where international oil companies are reluctant or banned to go). Both the Chinese government and the resource-owner governments love to include these deals into wider diplomatic packages but these are primarily commercial deals which make commercial sense for the Chinese companies.
............................................................................................................................................
The Stern Report described climate change as ‘the greatest and widest-ranging market failure ever seen.’ Correcting market failures typically requires government, i.e. political intervention. How would a free market in global energy address these market failures and help us address the impacts of climate change? Chris Morrison, London
Pierre Noël: Energy markets themselves will simply not address climate change, at least not in a meaningful way. This is why I think it is not helpful to bundle energy security (strictly defined) and climate change into a single, wider definition of energy security. For climate change, the exact size of the market failure is disputed (Stern’s view of the size is clearly way above all other academic economists) but its existence is not and it is certainly a very large one. For energy security, the size of the market failure is usually vastly exaggerated by commentators and politicians.
............................................................................................................................................
I have two questions: 1) The EU and the Russian Federation (RF) have an evolving partnership in energy trade. Can this relationship create observable spill-over effects on the EU-RF political relations? 2) Turkey is an EU candidate country bordering Middle East, Balkans and the Caucasus. What kind of role would Turkey play with regard to the EU-RF energy trade relations? Argun Baskan, Turkey
Pierre Noël: I think that the best the EU can do is to organise its gas market in a way that minimises the impact of supply disruptions, whatever their origins and causes. Europe needs an integrated, competitive gas market which would vastly increase the level of security of supply enjoyed by European consumers. France and Germany fiercely resist because their big gas companies would lose their comfortable (and profitable) positions.
An integrated and competitive gas market in Europe would also trigger a complete re-structuring of the EU-Russia relationship, reducing Moscow’s ability to leverage its bilateral energy links in the foreign policy sphere.
Some see Turkey as a key transit country for Central Asian and Middle East gas exports to Europe. I do not think that Turkish membership of the EU would significantly increase the likelihood of such projects.
............................................................................................................................................
How do you see Asian countries, particularly China using sovereign wealth funds to secure energy resources? How important will the Straits of Malacca be for these countries’ foreign policies? Stephen Ranger, Seoul, Korea
Pierre Noël: The Malacca problem is vastly exaggerated. If the straight were closed, tankers would take a longer route to the South – freight rates would go up, end of story.
About sovereign funds: buying oil and gas reserves abroad will not provide Chinese consumers with any additional energy security. For China - as for every other country - energy security is mostly built at home. Oil supply insecurity in China (chronic shortages of oil products) is due to price regulations and restricted freedom to import crude and products. It has nothing to do with a lack of ‘control’ over oil reserves or shipping lanes.
............................................................................................................................................
About the expert: Dr Noël is at the University of Cambridge’s EPRG, an energy and environmental policy research group and also a Senior Policy Fellow at the European Council on Foreign Relations. He has worked for almost 10 years on the interaction between foreign policies, energy markets and international security. He specialised in US international oil policy and now works also on Chinese energy security policies, the EU approach to international energy issues, and the geopolitics of natural gas markets.
Developed nations are facing a severe energy security crisis, according to many analysts. And at the heart of energy security are many of the most important political, economic and environmental questions facing the world.
Perennial tensions in the Middle East affect oil supplies. Russia falls out with its neighbours over the supply of gas. Stark warnings of environmental catastrophes demand big changes to energy use. Nuclear power is clearly back on the agenda in some nations.
However, Cambridge University’s Pierre Noël, argues in the FT that the increasing use of energy resources as political tools does not in fact justify a tough new paradigm for energy security policy. He argues that ensuring a free global market in energy is the best line of defence.
So what are the biggest energy security challenges for the world? And what are the best solutions? What, for example, is the role of energy hungry China? How should the European Union deal with Russia?
Our thanks to Dr Noël for answering these questions on Thursday, 17 January 2008.
............................................................................................................................................
’Energy Security’ has become a very frequently used term, but it also seems to be one of the most poorly defined. If we assume that a useful definition goes beyond the assumption that states who have energy are ’secure’ and states that don’t are not, what can you offer by way of a definition of Energy Security, and what are its key dimensions?Iain Grant, Alberta, Canada
Pierre Noël: The most popular definition of energy security mentions the ‘availability’ of energy, its ‘affordability’ and often its ‘environmental sustainability’. This is not a very useful definition.
Affordability is a relative notion: affordable to whom and to do what? Furthermore, energy commodities become less affordable when markets are tight, but that is the very condition for them to remain available. Adding environmental sustainability is not helpful because most of the time there is a clear tradeoff between the ‘affordability’ of energy and its environmental impact.
Clean energy is relatively expensive.
I would advocate a narrow definition of energy security, centered on the availability of energy to those who are willing to pay the market price. Energy insecurity can then be linked to situations when energy markets do not function properly. Energy security policies should be mostly aimed at ‘making markets work’ and letting them work when they do.
............................................................................................................................................
Who will get the last barrel of oil? The country the oil is extracted from, the country with the most money, or the country with the most weapons?Wayne Rogers, Canada
Pierre Noël: There will be many ‘last barrels’ consumed at the same time, probably by relatively poor people in relatively poor countries – some of them extracting oil.
............................................................................................................................................
Is the American policy of projecting military might across the oil-rich Persian Gulf and its support for reactionary governments in the region misguided? After all, even the most hot-headed revolutionaries in the region still need to export oil to survive so there is no meaningful threat to the west’s energy security, whereas the US policies ensure that democracy and pluralism will not take root in the area. Borzou Aram, London
Pierre Noël: Protecting the flow of oil to the world market probably does not require a permanent, massive US military presence in the Gulf. Some in Washington are openly talking about moving back to an “over the horizon” military posture.
The US has long acted as a policeman in the Middle East, simply deterring the “bad guys” (Iran, then Iraq) from unsettling the status quo. When deterrence failed with Saddam Hussein in 1990, the US did not hesitate to send massive military power to the region. Under GW Bush the policy has changed radically as the US has transformed itself into a political engineer in the Middle East, trying to re-draw the political and ideological map of the region.
This policy shift was certainly not required in terms of energy security and it has had negative energy security consequences – not only for the US but for all consumers.
............................................................................................................................................
Are Europe-based energy sources like wind and nuclear bringing more or less security of supply? Jean-Michel Glachant, University Paris Sud, France
Pierre Noël: Wind is an intermittent source of power supply, unpredictable and relatively concentrated geographically (Scotland in the UK example). Massively increasing the share of wind in the electricity mix, as Europe and the UK want to do, almost certainly decreases energy security (or, which is the same thing, increases the cost of maintaining the reliability of the electricity system).
Nuclear is probably neutral in terms of energy security compared to other non-intermittent sources (coal, natural gas).
The fact that wind and nuclear are ‘non-imported’ sources of energy is irrelevant as far as energy security is concerned.
............................................................................................................................................
There is a view that the current spike in energy prices is here to stay, at least for 5-10 years, due to underinvestment in oil and gas production infrastructure. Do you see this current period of high prices being different to those in the past in that they are stimulating a significant shift to alternative energy sources or will oil remain the main source of energy? If so, what do you see being the dominant trends in energy production? Adam Keats, London
Pierre Noël: I will not try to predict the price of oil! That said, the current period of high prices is clearly different from previous periods. Production outside OPEC and the Former Soviet Union has stopped growing, despite five full years of very high prices and record investment budgets from oil companies. It is probably very close to its maximum possible production. In that context, growing demand has come and ‘bumped up’ against production capacities in the Middle East, sending prices to the current levels.
If anything it will be more difficult, not less, to shift to alternatives this time. The 1970s oil shocks had triggered massive substitution, especially in the power generation and industrial sectors. Some of that might be replicable – at a cost – in developing countries, especially Asian emerging economies. But in the OECD oil demand is now highly concentrated in the transportation sector where price elasticities are low.
............................................................................................................................................
The current global energy market is anything but free. The biggest cartel in the history of market economy prevents national governments from responding with free market measures. Do you believe a free global market can exist with the presence of OPEC? Zhou Xi, Hong Kong
Pierre Noël: No market is perfect and the oil market works much, much better than most. All other things being equal, the price would be lower without OPEC, no doubt. But OPEC is here to stay and its market power is bound to increase with the peak in non-OPEC supply.
The relevant policy question is: ‘What should we as oil consumers do to ensure the highest possible level of energy security?’ The answer is:
1. Let the market work freely, always.
2. Maintain emergency storage
3. Invest in R&D for alternative transportation technologies and fuels.
The most important is No. 1.
............................................................................................................................................
Is it possible to calculate the cost in dollars per barrel of securing oil supply through US military intervention in the Mideast Gulf since the first Gulf crisis in 1990-91? Is this a wise foreign policy, and does it make the Pentagon the source of US energy policy rather than the Department of Energy? Ian Bourne, London
Pierre Noël: Academic studies have consistently valued the ‘energy security premium’ at between zero and $0.33/gallon. The price in the US is currently around $3/gallon.
Most of the US military presence in the Middle East is not required to protect the oil market.
............................................................................................................................................
Do you believe that we are living in a time of constricting oil supply based on the Hubbert Peak theory? Ambrose
Pierre Noël: I believe that oil supply will eventually peak. As it continues to grow, by definition it has not peaked yet!
............................................................................................................................................
What options do developing countries have in the future if US, Europe and others impose restrictions on the imports from the countries with no regulations on GHG emission reductions and force developing countries to adopt ’costly’ clean energy options, restricting power generation from cheap and abundantly available coal for their energy security? Hari, Auckland
Pierre Noël: Such taxes would increase the price of imported goods in developed countries (cheap Chinese goods would become a bit more expensive). I doubt it would significantly accelerate the transition of China towards a cleaner energy economy. But these taxes might be welcomed by European and American manufacturers.
............................................................................................................................................
In the case of China, for example, national oil companies are increasingly driven by government agenda to seek resources elsewhere, almost making oil deals into government diplomatic exchanges instead of business transactions. With China’s growing influence, do you believe that re-nationalisation of this sector is inevitable? Zhou Xi, Hong Kong
Pierre Noël: Chinese oil companies seem already to enjoy significant – though far from complete -- strategic autonomy, and will probably enjoy more in the future. They try to build portfolios of assets outside China and they go first where there is relatively less competition (places where international oil companies are reluctant or banned to go). Both the Chinese government and the resource-owner governments love to include these deals into wider diplomatic packages but these are primarily commercial deals which make commercial sense for the Chinese companies.
............................................................................................................................................
The Stern Report described climate change as ‘the greatest and widest-ranging market failure ever seen.’ Correcting market failures typically requires government, i.e. political intervention. How would a free market in global energy address these market failures and help us address the impacts of climate change? Chris Morrison, London
Pierre Noël: Energy markets themselves will simply not address climate change, at least not in a meaningful way. This is why I think it is not helpful to bundle energy security (strictly defined) and climate change into a single, wider definition of energy security. For climate change, the exact size of the market failure is disputed (Stern’s view of the size is clearly way above all other academic economists) but its existence is not and it is certainly a very large one. For energy security, the size of the market failure is usually vastly exaggerated by commentators and politicians.
............................................................................................................................................
I have two questions: 1) The EU and the Russian Federation (RF) have an evolving partnership in energy trade. Can this relationship create observable spill-over effects on the EU-RF political relations? 2) Turkey is an EU candidate country bordering Middle East, Balkans and the Caucasus. What kind of role would Turkey play with regard to the EU-RF energy trade relations? Argun Baskan, Turkey
Pierre Noël: I think that the best the EU can do is to organise its gas market in a way that minimises the impact of supply disruptions, whatever their origins and causes. Europe needs an integrated, competitive gas market which would vastly increase the level of security of supply enjoyed by European consumers. France and Germany fiercely resist because their big gas companies would lose their comfortable (and profitable) positions.
An integrated and competitive gas market in Europe would also trigger a complete re-structuring of the EU-Russia relationship, reducing Moscow’s ability to leverage its bilateral energy links in the foreign policy sphere.
Some see Turkey as a key transit country for Central Asian and Middle East gas exports to Europe. I do not think that Turkish membership of the EU would significantly increase the likelihood of such projects.
............................................................................................................................................
How do you see Asian countries, particularly China using sovereign wealth funds to secure energy resources? How important will the Straits of Malacca be for these countries’ foreign policies? Stephen Ranger, Seoul, Korea
Pierre Noël: The Malacca problem is vastly exaggerated. If the straight were closed, tankers would take a longer route to the South – freight rates would go up, end of story.
About sovereign funds: buying oil and gas reserves abroad will not provide Chinese consumers with any additional energy security. For China - as for every other country - energy security is mostly built at home. Oil supply insecurity in China (chronic shortages of oil products) is due to price regulations and restricted freedom to import crude and products. It has nothing to do with a lack of ‘control’ over oil reserves or shipping lanes.
............................................................................................................................................
About the expert: Dr Noël is at the University of Cambridge’s EPRG, an energy and environmental policy research group and also a Senior Policy Fellow at the European Council on Foreign Relations. He has worked for almost 10 years on the interaction between foreign policies, energy markets and international security. He specialised in US international oil policy and now works also on Chinese energy security policies, the EU approach to international energy issues, and the geopolitics of natural gas markets.
Bush seeking Saudis' help on oil prices
This is from the Seattle times,..
=====
By Kevin G. Hall
McClatchy Newspapers
WASHINGTON — In April 1986, Vice President George H.W. Bush traveled to Saudi Arabia with a stern warning. Record low oil prices of $10 a barrel threatened the U.S. oil industry and U.S. national security. If prices don't rise, he warned, perhaps a U.S. tariff on imported oil would do the job.
More than 22 years later, his son George W. Bush is on a similar mission, but with the opposite goal in mind. President Bush meets today with Saudi King Abdullah and will lobby for help in bringing down world oil prices, which have raced past $125 a barrel.
Then and now, the Saudis are the only oil power with enough unused production capacity to make a difference on price if they increase supply. But the hard fact is that the world oil market has changed, and Saudi Arabia is far from the only producer holding the fate of U.S. consumers in its hands. Even if the Saudis increase production, shortfalls elsewhere, along with rising global demand, can offset their efforts — and are.
Many Americans grumbling at the gas pump are quick to blame the Saudis for their woes — just as many might be surprised to learn that Saudi Arabia trails Canada and Mexico as the chief suppliers of foreign oil to the United States and isn't far ahead of Venezuela, Nigeria and Angola. Saudi Arabia provided 14 percent of U.S. oil imports in 2006. Still, if it boosted production significantly, added world supplies would tend to drive global oil prices down, regardless of who bought its exports.
Saudi Arabia is the world's only significant swing producer: Its oil production can be ratcheted up or down to lower or raise prices worldwide. (Iraq potentially could do the same if it achieved stability, but that's not a near-term prospect.)
So what have the Saudis done since 2005, when oil prices climbed above $70 a barrel, then $80, then $90, and this year broke the once-unthinkable threshold of $100? They have increased production capacity, meaning that in a pinch they could make up the difference between global demand and available supply. They now can produce 11 million barrels per day, or bpd, and expect that number to reach 12.5 million bpd by 2010.
"They've not only invested tens of millions of dollars to increase production capacity. They've increased their actual production from 8.5 million barrels per day (mbpd) to 9.2 mbpd," said Frank Verrastro, director of the energy and national-security program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a center-right think tank.
His numbers are somewhat squishy; actual production numbers are hard to verify. Some critics believe the Saudi government has increased capacity but actually dropped output by 1 million bpd over the past two years. The Energy Information Administration, the statistical arm of the Energy Department, said that in 2006 — the last full year for which it has data — the Saudis produced 10.7 million bpd.
That's why some Democrats in Congress, including New York Sen. Charles Schumer, are threatening to hold up a $1 billion-plus arms deal for the Saudis, a crucial ally in the global war on terror, unless the kingdom puts more oil on international markets.
"We are saying to the Saudis that if you don't help us, why should we be helping you?" Schumer said this week.
The Saudis are said to be reluctant to pump much more oil since U.S. oil inventories of late have been higher than five-year averages. That suggests that oil isn't in short supply here, and that other factors, such as the weakening U.S. dollar and speculation in commodities markets, are driving up prices.
"I think the president has no intention whatsoever of having the Saudis put more oil in the market," said Fadel Gheit, an industry analyst for Oppenheimer & Co. in New York. "If the president wanted the Saudis to do that, he would not have asked them publicly."
Nevertheless, global oil prices are still rising. Why? Because global demand for oil is growing outside the United States, which alone accounts for one-quarter of world oil consumption. China and the Middle East each account for about one-third of new oil demand, and they are sopping up new production. The Paris-based International Energy Agency this month estimated global oil demand in 2008 at 86.8 million bpd, about 1.2 million bpd more than in 2007.
In addition, other important oil suppliers are falling short in production for various reasons.
Nigeria has more than 1 million bpd of production offline because of civil strife. Russia is the world's second-largest oil producer and exporter, but after nearly a decade of increasing production, it seems to have reached a plateau for easily accessible oil, and output is flat.
In Mexico, the second-most important supplier to the United States, production continues to erode faster than forecast in the giant offshore oil field called Cantarell. For political reasons — nationalism — the country has been unable to modify its foreign investment laws to allow state-owned Petroleos Mexicanos (PEMEX) to work with major oil companies to explore for deep-water oil in the Gulf of Mexico or develop its hard-to-access oil deposits in Veracruz state.
"Mexico has a lot of potential, but its hands are tied politically," said oil historian Daniel Yergin, author of "The Prize," the definitive account of oil's rise to economic importance. "I think if the Mexican industry had access to the technology and could call upon the skill and experience of the international industry, it could turn the picture around within a few years. But it is just really constrained."
Yergin made headlines two years ago, swimming against the current by predicting a potential oil glut as more production came on line. He turned out to be half right.
Brazil's offshore oil discoveries and a bevy of projects around the world slated for development suggest there's still plenty of petroleum to be pumped. But the rising costs for everything from offshore rigs to petroleum engineers to ocean transportation have delayed completion of these projects significantly.
"There've been shortages of people, equipment, rising prices of steel and other commodities. And that has really constrained the supply" of oil, Yergin said.
President Bush seems resigned to high oil prices for now, telling CBS Radio on Monday before he left for the Middle East that the "demand for oil is so high relative to supply these days that there's just not a lot of excess capacity."
Since about 40 percent of the world's oil comes from the cartel OPEC, member countries have little incentive to reduce the price by producing more. They earn more by producing less. Asking them to produce more is effectively asking them, instead of the American consumer, to swallow a loss.
"We don't ask Microsoft to do that. We don't ask Coca-Cola to do that. But somehow we think the oil companies should do that," Verrastro said.
The United States has 5 percent of the world's population but uses one-quarter of all oil produced. It is the third-largest oil producer, sitting atop plenty of oil in Alaska and along its coastlines that for political reasons it chooses not to tap.
=====
By Kevin G. Hall
McClatchy Newspapers
WASHINGTON — In April 1986, Vice President George H.W. Bush traveled to Saudi Arabia with a stern warning. Record low oil prices of $10 a barrel threatened the U.S. oil industry and U.S. national security. If prices don't rise, he warned, perhaps a U.S. tariff on imported oil would do the job.
More than 22 years later, his son George W. Bush is on a similar mission, but with the opposite goal in mind. President Bush meets today with Saudi King Abdullah and will lobby for help in bringing down world oil prices, which have raced past $125 a barrel.
Then and now, the Saudis are the only oil power with enough unused production capacity to make a difference on price if they increase supply. But the hard fact is that the world oil market has changed, and Saudi Arabia is far from the only producer holding the fate of U.S. consumers in its hands. Even if the Saudis increase production, shortfalls elsewhere, along with rising global demand, can offset their efforts — and are.
Many Americans grumbling at the gas pump are quick to blame the Saudis for their woes — just as many might be surprised to learn that Saudi Arabia trails Canada and Mexico as the chief suppliers of foreign oil to the United States and isn't far ahead of Venezuela, Nigeria and Angola. Saudi Arabia provided 14 percent of U.S. oil imports in 2006. Still, if it boosted production significantly, added world supplies would tend to drive global oil prices down, regardless of who bought its exports.
Saudi Arabia is the world's only significant swing producer: Its oil production can be ratcheted up or down to lower or raise prices worldwide. (Iraq potentially could do the same if it achieved stability, but that's not a near-term prospect.)
So what have the Saudis done since 2005, when oil prices climbed above $70 a barrel, then $80, then $90, and this year broke the once-unthinkable threshold of $100? They have increased production capacity, meaning that in a pinch they could make up the difference between global demand and available supply. They now can produce 11 million barrels per day, or bpd, and expect that number to reach 12.5 million bpd by 2010.
"They've not only invested tens of millions of dollars to increase production capacity. They've increased their actual production from 8.5 million barrels per day (mbpd) to 9.2 mbpd," said Frank Verrastro, director of the energy and national-security program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a center-right think tank.
His numbers are somewhat squishy; actual production numbers are hard to verify. Some critics believe the Saudi government has increased capacity but actually dropped output by 1 million bpd over the past two years. The Energy Information Administration, the statistical arm of the Energy Department, said that in 2006 — the last full year for which it has data — the Saudis produced 10.7 million bpd.
That's why some Democrats in Congress, including New York Sen. Charles Schumer, are threatening to hold up a $1 billion-plus arms deal for the Saudis, a crucial ally in the global war on terror, unless the kingdom puts more oil on international markets.
"We are saying to the Saudis that if you don't help us, why should we be helping you?" Schumer said this week.
The Saudis are said to be reluctant to pump much more oil since U.S. oil inventories of late have been higher than five-year averages. That suggests that oil isn't in short supply here, and that other factors, such as the weakening U.S. dollar and speculation in commodities markets, are driving up prices.
"I think the president has no intention whatsoever of having the Saudis put more oil in the market," said Fadel Gheit, an industry analyst for Oppenheimer & Co. in New York. "If the president wanted the Saudis to do that, he would not have asked them publicly."
Nevertheless, global oil prices are still rising. Why? Because global demand for oil is growing outside the United States, which alone accounts for one-quarter of world oil consumption. China and the Middle East each account for about one-third of new oil demand, and they are sopping up new production. The Paris-based International Energy Agency this month estimated global oil demand in 2008 at 86.8 million bpd, about 1.2 million bpd more than in 2007.
In addition, other important oil suppliers are falling short in production for various reasons.
Nigeria has more than 1 million bpd of production offline because of civil strife. Russia is the world's second-largest oil producer and exporter, but after nearly a decade of increasing production, it seems to have reached a plateau for easily accessible oil, and output is flat.
In Mexico, the second-most important supplier to the United States, production continues to erode faster than forecast in the giant offshore oil field called Cantarell. For political reasons — nationalism — the country has been unable to modify its foreign investment laws to allow state-owned Petroleos Mexicanos (PEMEX) to work with major oil companies to explore for deep-water oil in the Gulf of Mexico or develop its hard-to-access oil deposits in Veracruz state.
"Mexico has a lot of potential, but its hands are tied politically," said oil historian Daniel Yergin, author of "The Prize," the definitive account of oil's rise to economic importance. "I think if the Mexican industry had access to the technology and could call upon the skill and experience of the international industry, it could turn the picture around within a few years. But it is just really constrained."
Yergin made headlines two years ago, swimming against the current by predicting a potential oil glut as more production came on line. He turned out to be half right.
Brazil's offshore oil discoveries and a bevy of projects around the world slated for development suggest there's still plenty of petroleum to be pumped. But the rising costs for everything from offshore rigs to petroleum engineers to ocean transportation have delayed completion of these projects significantly.
"There've been shortages of people, equipment, rising prices of steel and other commodities. And that has really constrained the supply" of oil, Yergin said.
President Bush seems resigned to high oil prices for now, telling CBS Radio on Monday before he left for the Middle East that the "demand for oil is so high relative to supply these days that there's just not a lot of excess capacity."
Since about 40 percent of the world's oil comes from the cartel OPEC, member countries have little incentive to reduce the price by producing more. They earn more by producing less. Asking them to produce more is effectively asking them, instead of the American consumer, to swallow a loss.
"We don't ask Microsoft to do that. We don't ask Coca-Cola to do that. But somehow we think the oil companies should do that," Verrastro said.
The United States has 5 percent of the world's population but uses one-quarter of all oil produced. It is the third-largest oil producer, sitting atop plenty of oil in Alaska and along its coastlines that for political reasons it chooses not to tap.
Friday, May 02, 2008
Petrobras ya se puso ranchera!!!
Segun el financial times, Petrobras la empresa petrolera brasilenha ya se puso ranchera y no esta dispuesta a que Pemex NO comparta el petroleo con ella,... Aunque no dicen que esten presionando para que se lleve a cabo la privatizacion de PEMEX, o que se permitan los contratos riesgo,..
Abajo la nota,....
======
Petrobras rules out Mexican service role
By Ed Crooks in London and Adam Thomson in Mexico City
Published: April 29 2008 18:54 Last updated: April 29 2008 18:54
Petrobras would not be willing to work in Mexico as a service company, being paid a set rate rather than taking a share of oil production, according to Sergio Gabrielli, its chief executive.
Mr Gabrielli told the Financial Times that the Brazilian company had been in negotiations with Mexico. He added, however, that “I think we are not willing to go there as a service company”.
His comments are disappointing for the Mexican government, which faces a mounting crisis in its oil industry.
Oil production, for so long the pillar of Mexico’s economy and from which the government receives almost 40 per cent of its income, is falling faster than expected.
In November 2004, Mexico produced an average of 3.4m barrels per day. In November last year, by contrast, it produced just 2.9m.
Pemex, the state oil company, lacks the money and technical expertise to explore for oil in deep waters, where most analysts believe Mexico’s future lies. Petrobras is a world leader in deep-water exploration.
Mr Gabrielli refused to comment on suggestions that his company would be more acceptable in Mexico than, say, ExxonMobil of the US, saying the issue was “very sensitive”.
He also refused to comment on Mexican policy, saying “they have to decide”.
At the same time, Mexico was “trying to get drilling rigs for their own operation. They’re moving”, he said.
However, he added: “We have a multiple service agreement for gas production but – even though some of our people think differently – I think that the multiple service agreement is not enough for us to go for an actual exploration offshore.”
This month, Mexico’s conservative government led by President Felipe Calderón presented congress with an initiative that it believes will help turn things round. This would be by introducing greater flexibility into the country’s rigid rules governing private investment in oil.
If the bill passes through congress, private companies would be allowed to build and operate refineries, pipelines and transportation networks.
They could also receive bonuses for work carried out for Pemex, potentially increasing interest in one of the world’s most protected oil sectors.
Yet many analysts say the proposed reform does not go far enough. The potential changes do not envisage amending Mexico’s constitution, which prohibits Pemex from entering into joint-risk contracts with the private sector.
Pemex is replacing current production with new finds at a rate of only about 20 per cent. That is very low compared with new discoveries made by the world’s leading oil companies.
Abajo la nota,....
======
Petrobras rules out Mexican service role
By Ed Crooks in London and Adam Thomson in Mexico City
Published: April 29 2008 18:54 Last updated: April 29 2008 18:54
Petrobras would not be willing to work in Mexico as a service company, being paid a set rate rather than taking a share of oil production, according to Sergio Gabrielli, its chief executive.
Mr Gabrielli told the Financial Times that the Brazilian company had been in negotiations with Mexico. He added, however, that “I think we are not willing to go there as a service company”.
His comments are disappointing for the Mexican government, which faces a mounting crisis in its oil industry.
Oil production, for so long the pillar of Mexico’s economy and from which the government receives almost 40 per cent of its income, is falling faster than expected.
In November 2004, Mexico produced an average of 3.4m barrels per day. In November last year, by contrast, it produced just 2.9m.
Pemex, the state oil company, lacks the money and technical expertise to explore for oil in deep waters, where most analysts believe Mexico’s future lies. Petrobras is a world leader in deep-water exploration.
Mr Gabrielli refused to comment on suggestions that his company would be more acceptable in Mexico than, say, ExxonMobil of the US, saying the issue was “very sensitive”.
He also refused to comment on Mexican policy, saying “they have to decide”.
At the same time, Mexico was “trying to get drilling rigs for their own operation. They’re moving”, he said.
However, he added: “We have a multiple service agreement for gas production but – even though some of our people think differently – I think that the multiple service agreement is not enough for us to go for an actual exploration offshore.”
This month, Mexico’s conservative government led by President Felipe Calderón presented congress with an initiative that it believes will help turn things round. This would be by introducing greater flexibility into the country’s rigid rules governing private investment in oil.
If the bill passes through congress, private companies would be allowed to build and operate refineries, pipelines and transportation networks.
They could also receive bonuses for work carried out for Pemex, potentially increasing interest in one of the world’s most protected oil sectors.
Yet many analysts say the proposed reform does not go far enough. The potential changes do not envisage amending Mexico’s constitution, which prohibits Pemex from entering into joint-risk contracts with the private sector.
Pemex is replacing current production with new finds at a rate of only about 20 per cent. That is very low compared with new discoveries made by the world’s leading oil companies.
Thursday, May 01, 2008
by the way,.. business week didn't published my comment,... i wonder why
I put an extract of the comment to the businessweek's article, but it wasn't published. According to the site, the only restriction they have is the usage of rude language,.. well I didn't used any of it, and yet they didn't include my commment.
However they did include offensive comments to Mexican independece. For example, some guy 'jack' is openly calling to intervene Mexican territory and stole oil.
that position is not far from what Calderon is doing, but cheaper in that US won't spend in sending his mercenaries down to Mexican territory.
here is the comment I made, it was a shorter version of the one I uploaded here in the previous post,..
I would only point out that those in pemex who desperately argue for privatisation are the ones who have been accused of benefiting from Pemex’s corruption. Labastida Ochoa is one of them, and the nearly 2,000 millions that came round to pay for his presidential campaign. Camilo Mouriño and his empire of gasoline in southern Mexico is another. He has been accused of abusing office, and he started in the ministry of energy where he did good contracts benefiting his family enterprises.
Overall I think that the urgency for privatise has little to do with Mexican’s interest and more to do with the big companies, corrupt politicians in Mexico, and some ‘free market fundamentalists’. The question is why should Mexicans sell off the enterprise that has given them the resources to accomplish whatever little development they have?
As you can see there is no offensive language there, only my sincere opinion about the topic. Would this mean that businessweek only allows comments that 'fit' their own editorial view?
here are comments already on the site,...
Mexico's Oil Dilemma
All Reader Comments
page 1 of 1
Jack
Apr 29, 2008 3:36 AM GMT
The U.S. should seize mexico oil fields as payment for the gazillions we spend on 986 billion illegal aliens! We could easily overpower the mexicans and claim the oil fields by right of conquest!
Link to this comment
Clifford J. Wirth
Apr 29, 2008 2:39 AM GMT
A variety of independent sources conclude that Mexico's oil production peaked in 2004 and that it production will continue to decline despite more exploration and drilling. These sources include, the Association for the Study of Peak Oil, Energy Watch Group, EnergyFiles, and Peak Oil Associates International
Link to this comment
common sense
Apr 29, 2008 1:44 AM GMT
after reading the article who in their right mind would want to nationalize their oil reserves.
Link to this comment
common sense
Apr 29, 2008 1:43 AM GMT
after reading the article who in their right mind would want to nationalize their oil reserves.
Link to this comment
Sam Siphandone
Apr 28, 2008 11:27 PM GMT
US should nationalize its oil reserves. The Govt should should sell gas like selling postage stamp... Otherwise Exxon Mobil, Chevron and other oil companies reap profits of more than $60 billions per year while we Americans paid $4 or more per gallon....
Link to this comment
Devin Serpa
Apr 28, 2008 6:17 PM GMT
"Unless something is done quickly to allow Pemex to operate more as a real oil company..." You mean rape and pillage the planet?
Link to this comment
Elaine Morton
Apr 28, 2008 4:46 PM GMT
How do I reach Carlos Morales Gil,
Link to this comment
elaine morton
Apr 28, 2008 4:16 PM GMT
I need to desperately reach this gentlemen. I have acquired this Patent/Tool. This test was on Pemex Stationary, signed off by 8 PemexEngineers, and there are 300 Hydraulics in the ground that are applicable for Oi Enhancement. Proved over 40% Increase PEMEX Poza Rico Camp Oilfield Hydroimpact Technology Pilot Testing Results 1. PEMEX Poza Rico Camp Oilfield tested the hydroimpact tool of Wave Energy Resource for a period of 90 days and there was no any damage for the well or the formation; 2.. Please reply 602-263-8046
Link to this comment
However they did include offensive comments to Mexican independece. For example, some guy 'jack' is openly calling to intervene Mexican territory and stole oil.
that position is not far from what Calderon is doing, but cheaper in that US won't spend in sending his mercenaries down to Mexican territory.
here is the comment I made, it was a shorter version of the one I uploaded here in the previous post,..
I would only point out that those in pemex who desperately argue for privatisation are the ones who have been accused of benefiting from Pemex’s corruption. Labastida Ochoa is one of them, and the nearly 2,000 millions that came round to pay for his presidential campaign. Camilo Mouriño and his empire of gasoline in southern Mexico is another. He has been accused of abusing office, and he started in the ministry of energy where he did good contracts benefiting his family enterprises.
Overall I think that the urgency for privatise has little to do with Mexican’s interest and more to do with the big companies, corrupt politicians in Mexico, and some ‘free market fundamentalists’. The question is why should Mexicans sell off the enterprise that has given them the resources to accomplish whatever little development they have?
As you can see there is no offensive language there, only my sincere opinion about the topic. Would this mean that businessweek only allows comments that 'fit' their own editorial view?
here are comments already on the site,...
Mexico's Oil Dilemma
All Reader Comments
page 1 of 1
Jack
Apr 29, 2008 3:36 AM GMT
The U.S. should seize mexico oil fields as payment for the gazillions we spend on 986 billion illegal aliens! We could easily overpower the mexicans and claim the oil fields by right of conquest!
Link to this comment
Clifford J. Wirth
Apr 29, 2008 2:39 AM GMT
A variety of independent sources conclude that Mexico's oil production peaked in 2004 and that it production will continue to decline despite more exploration and drilling. These sources include, the Association for the Study of Peak Oil, Energy Watch Group, EnergyFiles, and Peak Oil Associates International
Link to this comment
common sense
Apr 29, 2008 1:44 AM GMT
after reading the article who in their right mind would want to nationalize their oil reserves.
Link to this comment
common sense
Apr 29, 2008 1:43 AM GMT
after reading the article who in their right mind would want to nationalize their oil reserves.
Link to this comment
Sam Siphandone
Apr 28, 2008 11:27 PM GMT
US should nationalize its oil reserves. The Govt should should sell gas like selling postage stamp... Otherwise Exxon Mobil, Chevron and other oil companies reap profits of more than $60 billions per year while we Americans paid $4 or more per gallon....
Link to this comment
Devin Serpa
Apr 28, 2008 6:17 PM GMT
"Unless something is done quickly to allow Pemex to operate more as a real oil company..." You mean rape and pillage the planet?
Link to this comment
Elaine Morton
Apr 28, 2008 4:46 PM GMT
How do I reach Carlos Morales Gil,
Link to this comment
elaine morton
Apr 28, 2008 4:16 PM GMT
I need to desperately reach this gentlemen. I have acquired this Patent/Tool. This test was on Pemex Stationary, signed off by 8 PemexEngineers, and there are 300 Hydraulics in the ground that are applicable for Oi Enhancement. Proved over 40% Increase PEMEX Poza Rico Camp Oilfield Hydroimpact Technology Pilot Testing Results 1. PEMEX Poza Rico Camp Oilfield tested the hydroimpact tool of Wave Energy Resource for a period of 90 days and there was no any damage for the well or the formation; 2.. Please reply 602-263-8046
Link to this comment
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
